MewCentury 
3ible 


Daniel 


Scttioo 


^-7 


THE    NEW-CENTURY   BIBLE 

Noiu  Complete 

GENESIS,  by  the  Rev.  Prof.  W.  H.  Bennett,  Litt.D.,  D.D. 

EXODUS,  by  the  Rev.  Prof.  W.  H.  Bennett,  Litt.D..  D.D. 

LEVITICUS  AND  NUMBERS,  by  the  Rev.  Prof.  A.  R.  S.  Kennedv,  M.A., 

D.D. 
DEUTERONOMY    and    JOSHUA,    by    the    Rev.    Prof.    H.    WiiEEi-ER 

Robinson,  M.A. 
JUDGES  AND  RUTH,  by  the  Rev.  Principal  G.  W.  Thatcher,  M.A.,  B.D. 
I  AND  II  SAMUEL,  by  the  Rev.  Prof.  A.  R.  S.  Kennedy,  M.A.,  D.D. 
I  AND  II  KINGS,  by  the  Rev.  Principal  Skinner,  D.D. 
I  AND  II  CHRONICLES,  by  the  Rev.  W.  Harvey-Jellie.  M.A.,  B.D. 
EZRA,  NEHEMIAH,  AND  ESTHER,  by  the  Rev.  Prof.  T.  WiTTON  Davies, 

B.A.,  Ph.D.,  D.D. 
JOB,  by  Prof.  A.  S.  PeAke,  M.A.,  D.D. 

PSALMS  (Vol.  I)  I  TO  LXXII,  by  the  Rev.  Prof.  Davison,  M.A.,  D.D. 
PSALMS  (Vol.  II)  LXXII  I  TO  END,  by  the  Rev.  Prof.  T.  Witton  Davies, 

B.A.,  Ph.D.,  D.D. 
PROVERBS,   ECCLESIASTES,  and    SONG    OF    SOLOMON,   by  the 

Rev.  G.  CURRIE  Martin,  M.A.,  B.D. 
ISAIAH  I-XXXIX,  by  the  Rev.  Prof.  OwEN  C.  Whitehouse,  M.A.,  D.D. 
IS.\IAH  XL-LXVI,  by  the  Rev.  Prof.  Owen  C.  Whitehouse,  M.A.,  D.D. 
JEREMIAH  (Vol.  I),  by  Prof.  A.  S.  Peake,  M.A.,  D.D. 
JEREMIAH  (Vol.  II),  AND  LAMENTATIONS,   by  Prof.  A.   S.   Peake, 

M.A.,  D.D. 
EZEKIEL,  by  the  Rev.  Prof.  W.  F.  LOFTHOUSE,  M.A. 
DANIEL,  by  the  Rev.  Prof.  R.  H.  Charles,  D.D. 
MINOR  PROPHETS  :  Hosea,  Joel,  Amos,  Obadiah,  Jonah,  Micah,  by 

the  Rev.  R.  F.  Horton,  M.A.,  D.D. 
MINOR     PROPHETS:     Nahum,    Habakkuk,     Zephaniah,     Haggai, 

ZechARIAH,  Malachi,  by  the  Rev.  Canon  Driver,  Litt.D.,  D.D. 

MATTHEW,  by  the  Rev.  Prof.  W.  F.  Slater,  M.A. 

MARK,  by  the  late  Principal  Salmond,  D.D. 

LUKE,  by  Principal  W.  F.  Adeney,  M.A.,  D.D. 

JOHN,  by  the  Rev.  J.  A.  McClymont,  D.D. 

ACTS,  by  the  Rev.  Prof.  J.  Vernon  Bartlet,  M.A.,  D.D. 

ROM.WS,  by  the  Rev.  Principal  A.  E.  Garvie,  M.A.,  D.D. 

I  AND  II  CORINTHIANS,  by  Prof.  J.  Massie,  M.A.,  D.D. 

EPHESIANS,    COLOSSIANS,    PHILEMON,    PHILIPPIANS,    by    the 

Rev.  G.  CURRIE  Martin,  M.A.,  B.D. 
I  AND  II  THESSALONIANS,  GALATIANS,  by  Principal  W.  F.  Adeney, 

M.A.,  D.D.  * 

THE  PASTORAL  EPISTLES,  by  the  Rev.  R.  F.  Horton,  M.A.,  D.D. 
HEBREWS,  by  Prof.  A.  S.  Peake,  M.A.,  D.D. 
THE  GENERAL  EPISTLES,  by  the  Rev.  Prof.  W.  H.  Bennett,  Litt.D., 

D.D. 
REVELATION,  bv  the  Rev.  Prof.  C.  Anderson  Scott,  M..\.,  B.D. 


THE    NEW-CENTURY    BIBLE 

DANIEL 


34 


Ihe  Xdininn?A  Geo^-OTiTxifftl  Iiiitatnte 


T.C.&E.C 


CopTriglit  -  JaJmBartboLameir &  Co- 


Ediiibur^li. 


Vf/ 


General  Editor  : 
Principal  Walter  F.  Adeney,   M.A.,  D.D. 


tH  (f  ooft  of  ©anief 

INTRODUCTION 

REVISED  VERSION   WITH   NOTES 

INDEX  AND   MAP 


/  EDITED   BY 


R.  H.  CHARLES,  D.Litt.,  D.D. 

fellow  of  merton  collegh 

fellow  of  the  BRITISH  ACADEMY 


NEW  YORK:  HENRY  FROWDE 

OXFORD    UNIVERSITY    PRESS,    AMERICAN    BRANCH 

EDINBURGH  :  T.  C.  &  E.  C.  JACK 


The  Revtsed  Version  is  printed  by  permission  of  the 
Universities  of  Oxford  and  Cambridge 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

Introduction  : 

§  I.  Historical  antecedents  of  Book  of  Daniel :  its 
pseudonymous  character  :  originally  unilingual, 
but  subsequently  bilingual;  its  various  ver- 
sions       .......  ix-xiii 

§  2.    Points     in     common    between     Prophecy    and 

Apocalyptic     ......       xiii,  xiv 

§  3.    Why  did  Apocalyptic  become  Pseudonymous  in 

Judaism? xiv-xvi 

§  4.    The  Ethical  Character  of  Apocalyptic        .        xvi-xix 
§  5.    Problems  connected  with  the  bilingual  character 
of  the  Book  of  Daniel.     Written  originally  as 
a  whole  in  Aramaic  ....      xix-xxvi 

§  6.   The  Versions xxvi-xxxi 

§  7.    All  Authorities  go  back  to  a  Glossed  Text   xxxi,  xxxii 

§  8.    Textual  Authorities  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  and 

their  Relations  represented  in  a  Genealogical 

Table       .....  xxxii,  xxxiii 

§  9.    Date  of  the  Book        ....       xxxiii-xxxvii 

§  10.    Chronological  Tables  ....   xxxvii-xli 

§  II.    Theology xli-xliii 

§  12.    Bibliography xliii-xlv 

Revised  Version  and  Commentary      .        .         .  1-144 

Index .       145-152 


MAP 

Syria,  Assyria,  Babylonia,  &c. 


THE   BOOK  OF   DANIEL 

INTRODUCTION 

§  I.  Historical  antecedents  of  Book  of  Daniel  : 
ITS  pseudonymous  character  :  originally 
unilingual,  but  subsequently  bilingual  : 
its  various  versions. 

In  the  dosing  years  of  the  Syrian  domination  of 
Palestine,  Antiochus  Epiphanes  sat  on  the  throne  of  Syria. 
With  his  struggles  with  Egypt  and  other  powers  we  are 
not  here  concerned,  but  only  with  his  dealings  with  the 
Jews.  His  ambition  was  to  hellenize  the  various  provinces 
and  peoples  in  his  great  Empire.  In  this  aim  he  met  with 
little  opposition  except  in  Judea,  and  even  there  he  secured 
without  difficulty  the  support  of  the  hellenizing  High 
Priests.  Thus  the  High  Priest  Jason,  a  creature  of 
Antiochus,  who  had  superseded  his  brother,  the  faithful 
High  Priest  Onias  III,  set  up  a  Greek  gymnasium  in 
Jerusalem,  to  join  in  the  games  of  which  the  very  priests 
abbreviated  the  sacred  services  of  the  Temple.  Through 
his  agency  also  contributions  were  sent  for  the  celebration 
of  the  festival  of  Heracles  at  Tyre.  Jason  was  succeeded 
by  Menelaus,  who  had  secured  the  High  Priesthood  by 
the  promise  of  a  huge  sum  of  money  to  Antiochus,  a  sum 
which  he  was  unable  to  raise  save  through  plunder  of  the 
Temple  treasury.  For  rebuking  this  treacherous  act, 
Onias  III,  referred  to  above,  paid  for  his  fidelity  with  his 
life.  In  170  B.C.,  while  Antiochus  was  warring  in  Egypt, 
the  rumour  that  he  had  fallen  encouraged  the  exiled  Jason 
to  make  an  attempt  to  recover  the  High  Priesthood,  This 
attempt  led  to  much  bloodshed  in  Jerusalem,  and  Antiochus 
on  his  return  treated  the  Jews  with  the  utmost  severity. 

Multitudes  of  men,  women,  and  children  were  put  to 
the  sword,  and  thousands  were  sold  into  slavery.     This 

B 


X  THE   BOOK   OF   DANIEL 

visit  of  Antiochus  closed  with  his  seizure  of  the  last 
treasures  of  the  Temple.  Thus  the  Jews  suffered  from 
without  as  well  as  from  within,  but  the  cup  of  their  sorrow 
was  not  yet  full.  Two  years  later  Antiochus  marched 
with  a  vast  force  into  Egypt  with  the  intention  of  making 
the  kingdom  of  the  Ptolemies  a  province  of  his  own 
Empire.  But  when  his  plans  seemed  on  the  eve  of  fulfil- 
ment he  was  met  by  envoys  from  Rome,  who  required 
him,  on  the  penalty  of  joining  issue  with  the  Republic 
itself,  to  withdraw  at  once  from  Egypt.  Enraged  and 
embittered  Antiochus  turned  homeward,  resolved  now  to 
devote  all  his  power  to  the  hellenization  of  Judea.  With 
this  object  in  view  he  forbade  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath 
and  the  practice  of  the  rite  of  circumcision.  The  sacrifices 
of  the  Temple  were  done  away  with,  and  every  form  of 
Jewish  worship  and  ceremonial.  The  sacred  books  were 
destroyed,  and  the  Temple  dismantled  and  laid  waste. 
The  walls  of  the  city  were  overthrown,  and  a  fortress 
erected  commanding  the  Temple  enclosure.  But  the 
culminating  horror  of  this  awful  time  was  yet  to  come.  On 
the  15th  of  December,  168  B.C.,  a  heathen  altar  was 
planted  on  the  site  of  the  great  altar  of  burnt  offering,  in 
honour  of  Olympian  Zeus.  On  the  25th  of  the  same  month 
the  profanation  of  the  sacred  precincts  was  consummated 
by  the  sacrifice  of  swine  on  the  altar.  Furthermore,  every 
city  and  village  was  required  to  build  temples  and  raise 
idolatrous  altars  on  which  swine  were  to  be  sacrificed 
daily. 

At  last  the  anguish  of  the  faithful  Jews  became  unen- 
durable and  an  insurrection  burst  forth  at  Modein,  under 
the  leadership  of  Mattathias  and  his  five  stalwart  sons. 
All  that  were  zealous  for  the  Law  and  the  Covenant 
speedily  joined  them,  and  amongst  these  notably  the 
Hasidim,  or  the  league  of  the  pious  ones.  This  small  body 
of  Jews  met  with  many  marvellous  successes.  Notwith- 
standing, in  the  face  of  the  vast  forces  of  Syria,  the  Jews 
could  repose  no  hope  in  their  own  powers.     If  they  were 


INTRODUCTION  xi 

to  succeed  it  could  not  be  in  reliance  on  the  arm  of  flesh. 
Now  it  was  just  at  this  crisis,  this  hour  of  mingled  hope 
and  despair,  that  the  Book  of  Daniel  *  appeared  with  its 
sword-edge  utterance,  its  piercing  exhortation  to  endure 
in  face  of  the  despot,  and  its  promise,  full  of  Divine  joy, 
of  near  and  full  salvation.  No  dew  of  heaven  could  fall 
with  more  refreshing  coolness  on  the  parched  ground,  no 
spark  from  above  alight  with  a  more  kindling  power  on 
the  surface  so  long  heated  with  a  hidden  glow.  With 
winged  brevity  the  book  gives  a  complete  survey  of  the 
history  of  the  kingdom  of  God  upon  earth,  showing  the 
relations  which  it  had  hitherto  sustained  in  Israel  to  the 
successive  great  heathen  empires  of  the  Chaldaeans,  Medo- 
Persians,  and  Greeks — in  a  word,  towards  the  heathenism 
which  ruled  the  world ;  and  with  the  finest  perception  it 
describes  the  nature  and  individual  career  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes  and  his  immediate  predecessors  so  far  as  was 
possible  in  view  of  the  great  events  which  had  just 
occurred.  Rarely  does  it  happen  that  a  book  appears  as 
this  did,  in  the  very  crisis  of  the  times,  and  in  a  form 
most  suited  to  such  an  age,  artificially  reserved,  close 
and  severe,  and  yet  shedding  so  clear  a  light  through 
obscurity,  and  so  marvellously  captivating.  It  was  natural 
that  it  should  soon  achieve  a  success  entirely  corresponding 
with  its  inner  truth  and  glory.  And  so,  for  the  last  time 
in  the  literature  of  the  Old  Testament,  we  have  in  this 
book  an  example  of  a  work  which,  having  sprung  from 
the  deepest  necessities  of  the  noblest  impulses  of  the  age, 
can  render  to  that  age  the  purest  service ;  and  which  by 
the  development  of  events  immediately  after,  receives  with 
such  power  the  stamp  of  Divine  witness  that  it  subse- 
quently attains  imperishable  sanctity  ^' 

The  pseudonymous  character  of  this  book  has  been 
a  source  of  great  trouble  to  many,  but  to  the  student  who 
is  acquainted  with  the  facts  of  the  time,  it  is  obvious  that, 

*  Ewald,  V.  305  (translated  by  Stanley). 
B  2 


xii  THE   BOOK   OF   DANIEL 

if  the  book  were  to  realize  the  end  it  aimed  at,  it  could 
not  have  been  otherwise  than  pseudonymous.  Owing  to 
the  Law  having  achieved  an  absolute  and  exclusive 
supremacy,  the  calling  of  the  prophet  had  ceased  to  exist, 
and  there  was  no  room  for  a  religious  teacher,  except  in 
so  far  as  he  was  a  mere  exponent  of  the  Law.  From  this 
it  followed  that  all  real  advances  to  a  higher  theology 
could  appear  only  in  works  of  a  pseudonymous  character. 
Accordingly,  when  a  man  of  God  felt  that  he  had  a  message 
to  deliver  to  his  people,  he  was  obliged  to  cast  it  in  this 
form.  And  thus  it  was  that  the  brilliant  visionary  to  whom 
we  owe  the  Book  of  Daniel  issued  under  the  name  of  an 
ancient  worthy  this  book  of  transcendent  worth  not  only 
to  his  own,  but  to  all  after  ages  (cf.  §  3).  It  has  taught  to 
mankind  many  imperishable  lessons,  and  of  these  there 
is  none  nobler  than  the  confession  of  the  three  youths, 
*  There  is  a  God,  whom  we  serve,  who  is  able  to  deliver 
us ,  . .  and  he  will  deliver  us  out  of  thine  hand,  O  King : 
but  if  not  ...  we  will  not  serve  thy  gods  nor  worship  the 
golden  image  which  thou  hast  set  up  '  (iii.  17,  18). 

The  Book  of  Daniel  was  most  probably  written  in 
Aramaic,  and  parts  of  it  subsequently  translated  into 
Hebrew  (cf.  §  5).  In  these  cases  the  Aramaic  original  was 
superseded  by  the  Hebrew.  At  a  very  early  stage  of  its 
history  glosses  were  introduced  into  the  text  (cf.  §  7). 

Not  long  after  the  book  assumed  a  bilingual  character 
and  was  glossed,  it  was  translated,  possibly  about  145  B.  C, 
into  Greek.  This  Greek  Version,  known  as  the  Septuagint, 
has  been  preserved  to  us  in  a  single  Greek  MS.  of  the 
eleventh  century,  but  happily  it  was  translated  into  Syriac 
about  the  year  A.  D.  617. 

In  the  meantime,  probably  in  the  first  century  B.  c,  a 
second  Greek  translation  was  made  from  the  bilingual 
text  under  the  guidance  of  the  older  translation.  But  by 
this  time  the  bihngual  text  had  undergone  severe  disloca- 
tions in  chapters  iv-vi.  Accordingly,  since  all  versions 
save  the  oldest  LXX  Version  are  derived  from  this  later 


INTRODUCTION  xiii 

form  of  the  bilingual  text,  they  all  attest  the  same  disloca- 
tions in  these  chapters.  But  to  return  :  this  second  Greek 
Version  has  not  survived  independently  but  only  in  quo- 
tations of  the  first  century  and  the  early  decades  of  the 
second  century  A.  D.,  and  in  the  version  of  Theodotion: 
of  which  it  appears  to  have  formed  the  basis  (cf.  §  6). 

The  Version  of  Theodotion,  which  belongs  to  the  second 
century  A.  D.,  approximates  closely  to  the  Massoretic  text, 
but  implies  in  many  passages  a  purer  form  of  the  Semitic 
text.  The  Peshitto  and  Vulgate  Versions  were  made 
from  a  still  later  form  of  the  Semitic  text  than  that  used 
by  Theodotion  *. 

§  2.  Points  in  common  between  Prophecy  and 

Apocalyptic  ^ 
The  forms  of  the  prophetic  experiences  as  beheld  by  the 
inner  eye,  or  heard  by  the  inner  ear,  as  well  as  their  literary 
expression,  must  take  their  character  largely  from  the 
spiritual  and  literary  standards  of  the  time.  This  psychical 
experience  of  the  prophet  was  generally  one  of  sight  or  of 
sound  ;  that  is,  in  the  psychical  state  he  either  saw  certain 
things  or  heard  certain  things.  Now  the  things  so  seen 
or  heard  he  could  grasp  only  so  far  as  his  psychical  powers 
and  the  spiritual  development  behind  him  enabled  him  to 
do  so  ;  that  is,  in  the  case  of  a  heavenly  vision  he  could 
at  the  best  only  partially  apprehend  its  significance.  To 
the  things  seen  he  perforce  attached  the  symbols  more  or 
less  transformed  that  these  naturally  evoked  in  his  mind, 
symbols  that  he  owed  to  his  own  waking  experience  or  the 
tradition  of  the  past ;  and  the  sounds  he  heard  naturally 

^  In  this  Introduction  many  critical  questions  are  perforce 
inadequately  dealt  with,  since  a  fuller  treatment  would  necessi- 
tate the  employment  of  Semitic  on  a  large  scale.  The  present 
editor  hopes  to  edit  a  fuller  commentary  later. 

2  In  the  above  section  I  have  only  mentioned  a  few  of  the 
characteristics  common  to  Prophecy  and  Apocalyptic.  For 
a  detailed  comparison  sec  the  second  edition  of  my  £"sc/m/o/o^^, 
1913,  in  loc. 


xiv  THE   BOOK   OF   DANIEL 

clothed  themselves  in  the  literary  forms  with  which  his 
memory  was  stored. 

And  yet,  however  successful  the  prophet  might  be  in 
setting  forth  his  visionary  experiences,  he  laboured,  as  we 
have  pointed  out,  under  a  double  disadvantage.  His 
powers  of  spiritual  perception  were  generally  unequal  to 
the  task  of  apprehending  the  full  meaning  of  the  heavenly 
vision,  and  his  powers  of  expression  were  frequently 
unable  to  set  forth  the  things  he  had  apprehended. 

Now  these  visions  and  trances  belong  both  to  prophecy 
and  apocalyptic.  Furthermore,  just  as  the  prophet  came 
not  unfrequently  to  use  the  words,  '  Thus  saith  the  Lord,' 
even  when  there  was  no  actual  psychical  experience  in 
which  he  heard  a  voice,  but  when  he  wished  to  set  forth  the 
will  of  God  which  he  had  reached  by  other  means,  so  the 
term  *  vision  '  came  to  have  a  like  conventional  use  both  in 
prophecy  and  apocalyptic.  It  is  of  special  importance  to 
remember  this  in  connexion  with  chapter  xi,  which  of 
course  is  not  to  be  taken  as  a  literal  vision.  The  Seer  is 
attempting  to  represent  the  course  of  events  sub  specie 
aeternitatis.  A  like  attempt  on  a  larger  scale  will  be 
found  by  the  reader  in  i  Enoch  Ixxxix-xc. 

§  3.  Why  did  Apocalyptic  become  pseudonymous 
IN  Judaism? 

The  fact  of  a  religious  teacher  issuing  his  work  under 
the  name  of  another  has  been  a  source  of  profound 
difficulty  to  most  biblical  students  in  the  past  and  to 
a  large  section  at  present. 

If  the  book  is  really  pseudonymous,  the  representatives 
of  these  students  would  categorically  declare  that  the 
book  is  a  forgery.  It  must  be  confessed  that  the  grounds 
which  scholars  have  in  the  past  adduced  for  the  use  of 
pseudonymity  by  Jewish  teachers  have  quite  failed  to 
justify  themselves  at  the  bar  of  the  ordinary  conscience. 
It  is  of  no  avail  to  state  that  such  writers  were  wholly 
devoid  of  literary  ambition  and  were  only  concerned  that 


INTRODUCTION  xv 

their  teaching  should  be  accepted.  No  more  will  it  avail 
to  argue  that  they  were  merely  making  use  of  a  literary 
form  that  was  common  throughout  antiquity.  If  they 
pursued  the  same  lofty  and  religious  aims  as  the  older 
prophets,  as  unquestionably  they  did,  how  is  it  that  they 
came  not  forward  with  their  message  in  their  own  persons? 
That  they  did  not  do  so  is  certainly  not  that  they 
feared  the  fate  that  befell  so  many  of  the  prophets  and 
that  would  assuredly  have  befallen  them  (cf.  Zech.  xiii. 
3  sqq.).  The  religious  leaders  of  the  Maccabean  period 
had  no  such  fear  of  death ;  they  were  only  too  ready  for 
martyrdom  as  we  know  from  actual  history.  The  real 
grounds,  therefore,  for  pseudonymity  must  be  found  else- 
where. Into  these,  which  I  have  discussed  at  some 
length  in  the  second  edition  of  my  Eschatology^  I  cannot 
enter  here.  I  will,  however,  for  the  sake  of  the  reader, 
summarize  my  results.  ^ 

From  the  time  of  Ezra  onwards,  the  Law  made  steady  ' 
progress  towards  a  position  of  supremacy  in  Judaism. 
And  just  in  proportion  as  it  achieved  such  supremacy, 
every  other  form  of  religious  activity  fell  into  the  back- 
ground. This  held  true  even  of  the  priesthood,  which  in 
due  course  became  subordinate  to  the  teachers  of  the  Law. 
But  in  an  infinitely  higher  degree  was  it  true  of  prophecy. 
When  once  the  Law  had  established  an  unquestioned 
autocracy,  the  prophets  were  practically  reduced  to  the 
position  of  being  merely  its  exponents,  and  prophecy, 
assuming  a  literary  character,  might  bear  its  author's 
name  or  might  be  anonymous.  When  a  book  of  prophecy 
brought  disclosures  beyond  or  in  conflict  with  the  letter  of 
the  Law,  it  could  hardly  attain  to  a  place  in  the  Canon. 
This  was  the  case  as  we  know  with  Ezekiel,  which  narrowly 
escaped  being  declared  apocryphal  by  Jewish  scholars 
(Shabb.  13  (^,  Men.  45  a)  as  late  as  the  first  century  of  the 
Christian  era.  The  next  claim  made  by  the  Law  was 
that  it  was  all-sufficient  for  time  and  eternity,  alike  as  an 
intellectual  creed,  a  liturgical  system,  and  a  practical  guide 


xvi  THE-  BOOK   OF   DANIEL 

in  ethics  and  religion.  Thus  theoretically  and  practically 
no  room  was  left  for  new  light  and  inspiration  or  any  fresh 
and  further  disclosure  of  God's  will ;  in  short,  no  room  for 
the  true  prophet— only  for  the  moralist,  the  casuist,  or  the 
preacher.  How  then  from  the  third  century  b.  C.  onward 
was  the  man  to  act  who  felt  himself  charged  with  a  real 
message  of  God  to  his  day  and  generation  ?  The  tyranny 
of  the  Law,  and  the  petrified  orthodoxies  of  his  time, 
compelled  him  to  resort  to  pseudonymity.  And  if  these 
grounds  had  in  themselves  been  insufficient  for  the  adop- 
tion of  pseudonymity,  there  was  the  further  ground — the 
formation  of  the  Canon.  When  once  the  prophetic  Canon 
was  closed,  no  book  of  a  prophetic  character  could  gain 
canonization  as  such,  nor  could  it  gain  a  place  among 
the  sacred  writings  at  all  unless  its  date  was  believed  to 
be  as  early  as  the  time  of  Ezra.  On  this  ground  again 
the  prophetic  type  of  man  was  forced  to  resort  to  pseudo- 
nymity to  obtain  a  hearing,  and  so  to  issue  his  work 
under  the  name  of  one  of  Israel's  ancient  worthies  of 
a  date  earlier  than  Ezra  or  at  all  events  contemporary 

,     with  him. 

i^ 

§  4.  The  Ethical  Character  of  Apocalyptic. 

Prophecy  has  always  been  recognized  as  the  greatest 
ethical  force  in  the  ancient  world.  Such  also  was  apoca- 
lyptic in  its  time,  and  yet  an  attempt  has  recently  been 
made  by  advanced  liberals  to  differentiate  prophecy  and 
apocalyptic  on  the  ground  that  apocalyptic  and  ethics  are 
distinct,  and  that  ethics  are  the  kernel  and  apocalyptic 
the  husk  which  Christianity  shed  when  it  ceased  to  need 
it.  How  any  scholar  who  was  really  acquainted  with  the 
texts  could  make  such  a  statement  I  cannot  understand. 
Apocalyptic  was  essentially  ethical.  To  use  the  mixed 
metaphor  of  St.  Paul,  it  was  rooted  and  grounded  in 
ethics,  and  that  an  ethics  based  on  the  essential  righteous- 
ness of  God.  In  every  crisis  of  the  world's  history,  when 
the  good  cause  was  overthrown  and  the  bad  triumphant, 


INTRODUCTION  xrii 

its  insistent  demand  was  ever :  '  Shall  not  the  Judge  of 
all  the  earth  do  right  ? '  and  its  uncompromising  optimism, 
its  unconquerable  faith  under  the  most  overwhelming 
disasters  was :  *  God  reigns,  and  righteousness  shall 
ultimately  prevail.'  The  words  of  a  modern  poet  would 
in  some  degree  represent  the  mental  attitude  of  the  apoca- 
lyptist,  in  his  outlook  on  the  apparent  triumph  of  evil  over 
good,  of  falsehood  over  truth  : 

'Careless    seems    the  great  Avenger;      history's    pages 

but  record 
One  death-grapple  in  the  darkness  twixt  old  systems  and 

the  Word  ; 
Truth  for  ever  on  the  scaffold,  wrong  for  ever  on  the 

throne  : 
Yet  that  scaffold  sways  the  future  and   behind   the  dim 

unknown 
Standeth  God  within  the  shadow  keeping  watch  above 
His  own.' 

The  ethical  element  is  the  fundamental  element  in  the 
chief  books  of  this  literature.  What  else  but  an  inex- 
pugnable sense  of  truth  and  duty  to  truth  inspire  the 
refusal  of  the  three  children  in  Daniel  to  fall  down  and 
worship  the  image  that  the  king  had  set  up  ?  When  the 
king  demands  :  '  Who  is  that  God  that  shall  deliver  you 
out  of  my  hands  ? '  mark  the  splendid  heroism  of  their 
reply  :  *  There  is  a  God  whom  we  serve  who  is  able  to 
deliver  us  from  the  burning  fiery  furnace,  and  he  will 
deliver  us  out  of  thy  hand,  O  king.  But  if  not,  be  it 
known  unto  thee,  O  king,  that  we  will  not  serve  thy 
g^ods,  nor  worship  the  golden  image  which  thou  hast  set 
up  '  (iii.  17  sq.)- 

Now  let  us  turn  to  the  apocalyptic  books  outside  the 
Canon. 

What  an  expressive  ethical  statement  is  that  in  Jubilees 
(xxi.  22)  addressed  to  Israel ! 

'Beware  lest  thou  walk  in  their  ways 
And  tread  in  their  paths. 


xviii  THE   BOOK   OF   DANIEL 

And  sin  a  sin  unto  death  against  the  Most  High, 
And  so  He  deliver  thee  back  again  into  the  grip  of  thy 
transgression.' 

Or,  turning  to  a  different  theme,  let  us  hear  what  the 
Testaments  of  the  XII  Patriarchs  say  of  the  faithful  doer 
of  the  word  of  God. 

'  Every  man   that  knoweth  the  law  of  the  Lord  shall  be 

honoured, 
And  shall  not  be  a  stranger  whithersoever  he  goeth  .  .  . 
For  though  there  be  a  leading  into  captivity, 
And  cities  and  lands  be  destroyed, 
And  gold  and  silver  and  every  possession  perish, 
The  wisdom  of  the  wise  can  nought  take  away, 
Save  the  blindness  of  ungodliness, 
Or  the  callousness  that  comes  of  sin. 
Even  among  his  enemies  shall  wisdom   be   a   glory   to 

him, 
And  in  a  strange  country  a  fatherland, 
And  in  the  midst  of  foes  shall  prove  a  friend.' 

(T.  Levi,  xiii.  3,  7-8.) 

Or  again,  in  2  Enoch  (Ixiii.  2-3) :  *As  one  year  is  more 
honourable  than  another,  so  is  one  man  more  honourable 
than  another.  This  man  on  account  of  having  possessions, 
that  man  on  account  of  the  wisdom  of  the  heart,  another 
on  account  of  understanding,  another  on  account  of 
purity,  another  on  account  of  strength  .  .  .  but  let  it  be 
heard  everywhere  ;  there  is  none  greater  than  he  that 
feareth  God.* 

Or  again,  when  the  apocalyptist  says  of  the  unceasing 
service  of  an  order  of  heavenly  beings:  'They  rest  not  day 
nor  night ;  for  unto  them  thanksgiving  is  rest.' 

There  are  numberless  other  passages  showing  the  moral 
depth  and  inwardness  of  this  literature.  What  nobler 
advice  could  the  best  ethical  Christian  teacher  give  to  a 
defeated  rival  than  this  :  '  If  a  man  is  prospered  beyond 
you,  do  not  be  vexed,  but  even  have  recourse  unto  prayer 
on  his  behalf,  that  he  may  be   prospered   to  the   full ' 


INTRODUCTION  xit 

(T.  Gad.  vii.  i)  ?  Or  again  :  *  If  any  man  seeketh  to  do 
evil  unto  you,  do  him  a  good  turn,  and  pray  for  him,  and 
so  from  all  evil  ye  shall  be  redeemed  of  the  Lord '  (T.  Jos. 
xviii.  2).  Or  again  :  *  The  holy  man  is  merciful  to  him  that 
revileth  him,  and  holdeth  his  peace  '  (T.  Bunj.  v.  4). 

Now  it  would  be  possible  to  fill  many  pages  in  setting 
forth  the  teaching  of  apocalyptic  on  such  ethical  subjects  as 
conscience,  courage,  endurance,  longsufifering,  justice,truth- 
fulness,  temperance,  singleness  of  heart,  deceit,  calumny, 
folly  ;  on  religious  themes  of  an  ethical  character  as  love, 
faith,  works,  forgiveness,  compassion,  humility,  reverence, 
covetousness,  lust ;  or  on  metaphysical  themes  influencing 
ethics,  as  foreknowledge,  freedom,  determinism,  heredity, 
individualism,  universalism  ;  but  we  have  established  our 
thesis  sufficiently  for  our  present  purpose  ^ 

The  ethical  teaching  on  these  subjects  in  apocalyptic 
is  a  vast  advance  on  that  of  the  O.T.,  and  forms  the 
indispensable  link  which  in  this  respect  connects  the 
OT.  with  the  N.T. 

§  5.  Problems    connected    with    the    bilingual 

CHARACTER  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DaNIEL.  WRITTEN 
ORIGINALLY  AS  A  WHOLE   IN  ARAMAIC. 

I  shall  begin  with  a  short  statement  of  the  facts.  This 
statement  will  be  followed  by  a  brief  sketch  of  the  various 
theories  which  have  been  offered  for  the  solution  of 
these  problems.  It  is  possible,  indeed,  that  none  of  the 
theories  advanced  is  in  itself  adequate,  and  that  it  may 
be  necessary  to  invoke  the  joint  aid  of  two  or  more  of 
them.  For  as  the  problem  is  complex  it  is  possible  that 
the  solution  will  be  likewise  complex. 

I.  The  first  notable  difficulty  in  the  Book  of  Daniel  is 
connected  with  its  use  of  two  languages.  Thus  chapters 
i.  l-ii.  4  a  and  viii-xii  are  written  in  Hebrew,  and  ii.  ^b 

'  This  section  is  reprinted  from  my  Eschaiology"^,  1913?  190- 
193.  See  Maldwyn  Hughes,  The  Ethics  of  Jewish  Apocryphal 
Literature. 


XX  THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL 

(from  'O  king')-vii.  26  in  Aramaic.  The  difficulties 
occasioned  by  this  diversity  of  language  are  somewhat 
accentuated  by  the  fact  that  in  the  first  six  chapters 
Daniel  is  spoken  of  in  the  third  person,  whereas  in  the 
latter  six  he  is  represented  as  speaking  in  the  first.  The 
main  difficulty,  however,  is  connected  with  the  change  of 
language,  to  which  there  is  no  corresponding  change  of 
subject-matter.  A  like  change  of  language  is  found  in 
Ezra  iv.  8-vi.  18,  vii.  12-26,  but  there  this  change  can  be 
explained  from  the  subject-matter. 

How  then  is  the  change  of  language  in  Daniel  to  be 
explained  ?  Are  we  to  explain  it  as  due  to  diversity  of 
authorship  or  origin,  in  the  case  of  the  sections  in  ques- 
tion, and  thus  assume  that  these  sections  were  originally 
written  in  the  language  in  which  they  have  been  trans- 
mitted to  us  ?  or,  rejecting  this  hypothesis  and  assuming 
the  literary  unity  of  the  book,  are  we  to  believe  that  this 
present  difference  of  language  is  not  original,  but  that  the 
book  was  first  written  in  Hebrew,  and  that  the  loss  of 
certain  chapters  of  the  Hebrew  original  was  subsequently 
made  good  from  the  Aramaic  translation  ?  or  conversely, 
that  the  book  was  first  written  in  Aramaic  and  subse- 
quently translated  into  Hebrew,  and  that  the  Hebrew 
translation  was  in  part  destroyed  and  the  missing  portions 
supplied  from  the  Aramaic  original  ?  or,  finally,  that  the 
present  Hebrew  renderings  of  chapters  i.  i,  ii.  4  a,  viii- 
xii  were  deliberately  substituted  for  their  Aramaic  origi- 
nals in  order  to  gain  an  entrance  for  the  book  into  the 
canon  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  ;  for  Hebrew,  of  course,  was 
regarded  as  the  sacred  language. 

H.  The  second  notable  difficulty  connected  with  Daniel 
centres  in  the  wide  divergence  between  the  two  Greek 
Versions,  the  Versions  of  the  LXX  and  Theodotion. 
Where  this  divergence  appears,  which  is  the  most  trust- 
worthy ?  Here  also  full  consideration  must  be  given  to 
the  theory  that,  whereas  Theodotion's  Version  is  based 
directly  on  the  text  practically  as  it  stands  in  the  Bible, 


INTRODUCTION  xxi 

that  of  the  LXX  is  said  by  two  recent  scholars  to  have 
been  made  from  a  Hebrew  original  throughout. 

In  the  present  connexion  we  can  only  enumerate  the 
theories  that  have  been  advanced  to  explain  the  diversity 
of  language  in  the  text  of  Daniel. 

I.  Some  scholars  (Kliefoth,  Dan,  p.  44  ;  Keil,  Dan. 
p.  14)  were  of  opinion  that  Aramaic  was  the  vernacular  of 
Babylonia,  and  was  accordingly  used  in  the  sections 
relating  to  that  country. 

But  this  theory  cannot  for  a  moment  be  sustained.  The 
cuneiform  inscriptions  prove  that  the  language  of  Assyria 
and  Babylonia  was  indeed  Semitic,  but  a  Semitic  language 
distinct  from  Biblical  Aramaic. 

The  latest  connected  inscription  of  this  nature  is  that  of 
Antiochus  Soter  280-260  B.  C.  Gutbrod  (see  Prince's  Book 
of  Daniel^  p.  ll  note)  is  of  opinion  that  this  Semitic 
language  of  Assyria  was  spoken  until  Hellenic  times. 
As  a  language  of  the  learned  it  may  have  survived  till  the 
second  century  B.  c.  In  connexion  with  this  theory  we 
may  notice  the  popular  but  now  discredited  fallacy,  that 
the  Jews  forgot  their  Hebrew  in  Babylonia  and  spoke 
'  Chaldee '  on  their  return  to  Palestine— a  discredited 
fallacy  we  repeat ;  for  we  know  from  Nehemiah  that 
Hebrew  was  the  nominal  language  of  the  Jews  in  Jeru- 
salem in  430  B.  c.  (Neh.  xiii.  24). 

Biblical  Aramaic,  misnamed  *  Chaldee,*  was  not  brought 
across  the  Syrian  desert  by  the  Jews,  but  they  *  acquired 
gradually '  the  use  of  it  '  from  their  neighbours  in  and 
about  Palestine'  (Driver,  Dan,  p.  lix)  after  their  return 
from  the  captivityi^. 

II.  Other  scholars  seek  to  explain  diversity  oj language 
by  diversity  of  origin.  Thus  this  theory  finds  its  starting- 
point  and  justification  in  the  various  attempts  that  have 
been  made  to  anEilyse  Daniel  into  different  independent 
elements. 

^  See  Wright,  Comparative  Grammar^  1890,  p.  16;  Kautzsch, 
Gramm.  dts  Bibl.  Aram.,  §§  i,  a,  6. 


xxii  THE   BOOK   OF   DANIEL 

One  of  the  most  reasonable  theories  offered  under  this 
head  is  that  of  Meinhold  (in  Strack-Zockler's  Ktirzgef. 
Komfne?itar,  1889).  According  to  Meinhold  chapters  ii. 
4  ^-vi  were  a  piece  of  narrative  written  in  Aramaic  about 
300  B.C.  about  Daniel  and  his  history.  These  chapters 
a  writer  of  the  Maccabean  age  accommodated  to  the  needs 
of  his  own  time,  and  having  prefixed  i-ii.  4  «  as  an  intro- 
duction to  ii.  4  ^-vii,  he  supplemented  these  with  chapters 
viii-xii,  containing  visions  of  his  own  composition  with 
special  references  to  the  persecutions  of  Antiochus,  and 
issued  the  whole  as  a  bilingual  work.  Another  form  of 
this  theory  is  that  enunciated  by  Dalman  {Die  Worie 
Jesti,  p.  II,  1898),  Dalman  supposes  that  i-vi  and  vi-xii 
existed  independently.  The  former  was  written  in  Ara- 
maic, giving  an  account  of  Daniel's  experiences  and  those 
of  his  companions  at  the  court  of  Babylon.  For  a  work 
in  which  visions  were  interpreted  to  the  kings  of  Babylon, 
Aramaic,  which  was  the  li7igita  franca  of  the  whole  East 
at  that  time,  was  naturally  considered  suitable.  The 
second  part  of  the  book,  vii-xii,  was  written  in  Hebrew, 
as  it  recounts  Daniel's  own  visions  with  their  interpreta- 
tion by  an  angel,  who  of  course  would  use  only  the  sacred 
language.  The  redactor  then  took  the  two  works  in  hand, 
and  translated  i-ii.  4  a  into  Hebrew  and  vii  into  Aramaic, 
and  compressed  into  one  whole  the  two  halves  which  were 
distinguished  by  their  contents. 

in.  The  third  theory  is  that  which  commands  the 
assent  of  Driver,  Behrmann,  and  Kamphausen,  though  it 
is  to  be  observed  that  Driver  with  his  usual  caution  and 
judgement  does  not  absolutely  commit  himself  to  it,  but 
only  terms  it  as  *  relatively  the  best '  among  the  explana- 
tions offered.  According  to  Kamphausen  {Encyc.  Bibl.  I. 
1005)  'the  author  has  introduced  the  Chaldeans  as 
speaking  the  language  which  he  believed  to  be  custojuary 
luith  them :  afterwards  he  continues  to  use  the  same 
language  on  account  of  its  greater  convenience  both  for 
himself  and  for  his  original  readers,  both  in  the  narrative 


INTRODUCTION  xxiii 

portions  and  in  the  following  (seventh)  chapter,  the  piece 
in  companionship  to  chapter  ii ;  for  the  last  three  visions 
'{viii,  ix,  x-xii)  a  return  to  Hebrew  was  suggested  by  the 
consideration  that  this  had  from  of  old  been  the  usual 
sacred  language  for  prophetic  subjects.'  According  to 
Behrmann,  the  Chaldeans,  that  is  the  learned  priestly 
class  among  the  Babylonians,  are  introduced  as  speaking 
Aramaic  in  ii.  4  a  in  order  to  give  a  local  colouring.  The 
Aramaic  of  our  text,  it  is  true,  is  Western  Aramaic,  but 
the  distinction  between  Western  and  Eastern  Aramaic 
does  not,  Behrmann  says,  come  here  under  consideration. 
But  in  i.  4  it  is  said  that  clever  and  chosen  Jewish  youths 
required  three  years  to  learn  the  literature  and  tongue  of 
the  Chaldeans.  The  tongue  of  this  language  could  hardly 
therefore  be  a  form  of  Aramaic,  but  rather  Babylonian, 
a  Semitic  language  very  different  from  the  Hebrew,  or  it 
might  be  even  the  non-Semitic  Sumerian  preserved  in 
many  of  the  marginal  texts  in  the  cuneiform  script.  That 
Babylonian  was  an  unknown  language  is  stated  in  Jer.  v.  1 5. 

If,  therefore,  we  may  presume  that  our  author  was 
familiar  with  his  Jeremiah,  and  if,  as  Lenormant  informs 
us,  he  had  '  an  excellent  knowledge  of  Eastern  usages,* 
we  may  reasonably  conclude,  first,  that  he  does  not  con- 
found Babylonian  and  Aramaic,  and,  secondly,  that  he 
would  be  very  unlikely  to  represent  the  Chaldeans  as 
speaking  a  language  which  according  to  this  theory  was 
familiar  both  to  Jew  and  Chaldean.  The  words  '  in 
Aramaic'  in  ii.  4  are  therefore  with  Oppert,  Lenormant, 
Nestle,  Prince,  and  Marti  to  be  rejected  as  an  interpola- 
tion. Dr.  Driver  holds  that  this  excision  is  probably 
right. 

On  the  above  grounds,  therefore,  we  are  inclined  at 
present  to  conclude  that  the  change  of  language  in  Daniel 
did  not  originate  with  its  author.  From  considerations  of 
a  different  nature  we  had  previously  shown  that  it  was 
impossible  that  this  change  could  be  explained  by  diversity 
of  origin. 


xxvi  THE   BOOK   OF   DANIEL 

deliberately  undertaken  with  a  view  to  its  inclusion  in  the 
Canon. 

This  view  seems  to  accord  best  with  the  facts  of  the 
case,  but  it  requires  to  be  substantiated  by  a  much  larger 
body  of  evidence  than  has  yet  been  adduced. 

§  6.  The  Versions. 

The  chief  versions  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  are  :  (a)  the 
two  Greek  versions,  i.e.  the  LXX  and  Theodotion,  the 
two  Syriac  versions  ;  (d)  the  Peshitto  ;  (c)  that  of  Paul  of 
Telia  ;  and  {d)  the  Vulgate. 

(a)  The  Greek  Versions.  These  two  versions  are  of 
great  value  for  the  reconstruction  of  the  Text,  notably 
the  former.  As  we  are  aware,  the  LXX  unhappily  is 
preserved  only  in  one  very  corrupt  MS.,  i.e.  the  Codex 
Chisianus,  attributed  by  some  experts  to  the  ninth  and 
by  others  to  the  eleventh  century.  This  MS.  once 
belonged  to  Pope  Alexander  VII,  a  member  of  the  Chigi 
family.  It  was  not  till  more  than  a  century  after  his 
death  that  the  editio  princeps  of  this  MS.  was  published 
at  Rome  in  1772.  Many  editions  have  subsequently 
appeared,  the  most  recent  of  which  is  that  of  Dr.  Swete, 
who,  to  the  great  convenience  of  scholars,  prints  the 
versions  of  the  LXX  and  Theodotion  on  opposite  pages, 
and  appends  at  the  foot  of  the  LXX  version  the 
variants  from  the  Syriac  version  of  Paul  of  Telia.  This 
last  version  is  of  no  slight  interest.  It  was  made  by  Paul, 
bishop  of  Telia,  in  the  years  616-617  from  a  hexaplar 
text.  Thus  it  attests  the  condition  of  the  LXX  text  as 
it  existed  at  the  beginning  of  the  seventh  century.  As 
regards  the  date  of  the  LXX  version  of  Daniel,  it  is 
probable  that  it  was  made  in  the  latter  half  of  the  second 
century  B.  C.  circa  145. 

The  date  and  relations  of  Theodotion's  version  of 
Daniel  are  far  from  easy  to  determine.  According  to 
Irenaeus,  Theodotion  was  an  Ephesian,  but  according  to 


INTRODUCTION  xxvii 

Epiphanius,  a  native  of  Pontus  and  a  disciple  of  Marcion, 
before  he  adopted  Judaism,  whilejeromereportsthathewas 
probably  a  Jew  who  had  espoused  Ebionitic  Christianity. 
Epiphanius  assigns  the  period  of  his  activity  to  AureHus 
Commodus.  As  this  Commodus  reigned  from  i8o  to  192 
A.  D.  and  as  Marcion  flourished  about  150,  the  version  of 
Theodotion,  if  we  may  trust  Epiphanius,  was  written 
towards  the  close  of  the  second  century  A.  D.  The  Paschal 
Chronicle  follows  Epiphanius  and  ascribes  the  work  of 
Theodotion  to  the  year  184  A.D. 

The  above  date  is  very  doubtful,  and  is  in  all  probability 
two  or  more  decades  too  late.  But  even  if  we  could 
establish  as  early  a  date  as  150,  it  would  not  materially 
lessen  the  difficulties  which  embarrass  the  relations  of 
this  version  with  that  of  the  LXX.  For  we  find  that 
a  great  variety  of  readings  which  are  peculiar  to  Theo- 
dotion as  against  the  LXX  are  found  already  in  quota- 
tions from  Daniel  in  the  first  century  of  the  Christian  Era. 

Before  entering,  however,  on  this  large  question,  we 
should  observe  that  prior  to  Jerome's  time^  the  Church 
discarded  the  use  of  the  LXX  version  of  Daniel  in  favour 
of  that  of  Theodotion.  How  this  came  about  Jerome 
could  not  tell.  The  way  for  such  radical  action  had 
already  been  prepared  by  the  action  of  Origen,  whose 
citations  from  Daniel,  as  Dr.  Gwynn  writes  {Diet,  of 
Christian  Biography,,  iv.  974),  'agree  almost  verbatim 
with  the  text  of  Theodotion  now  current,'  a  fact  that 
accords  well  with  the  announcement  made  by  Origen,  in 
the  ninth  volume  of  his  lost  St?oviata,  that  he  intended  to 
use  this  version.     (Jerome  on  Dan.  iv.  6.) 

But  Theodotion's  version  was  used  by  several  of  the 
Fathers  before  Origen's  time.  Clement  of  Alexandria 
used  Theodotion  with  occasional  readings  from  the  LXX 
{Paed.  ii.  8  ;  iii.  3). 

^  Praef.  in  Dan.  '  Danielem  prophetam  iuxta  LXX  inter- 
pretes  ecclesiae  non  legunt,  utentes  Theodotionis  editione '  (cf. 
Contra,  Ruff.  ii.  33), 

C  9 


xxviii  THE   BOOK   OF   DANIEL 

In  North  Africa  Tertullian's  [ob.  240)  references  to 
Daniel  are  based  mainly  on  the  LXX  version,  though  in 
a  few  cases  he  cites  Daniel  according  to  Theodotion. 
His  contemporary  Cyprian  {ob.  258),  Burkitt  states,  took 
his  citations  from  the  Old  Latin  translation  of  Daniel 
according  to  the  LXX,  which  was  already  corrected 
according  to  Theodotion's  version.  At  an  earlier  date 
Hippolytiis,  the  pupil  of  Irenaeus,  adopted  this  version  in 
his  Commentary  on  Daniel  about  A.D.  202  ^  Hippolytus 
was  here  following  in  the  footsteps  of  his  master  Irenaeus, 
who  was  the  first  among  the  Fathers  to  quote  Daniel 
ix.  24-7  as  a  Messianic  prophecy  according  to  Theo- 
dotion's version. 

We  have  thus  far  only  mentioned  writers  who  lived 
subsequently  to  the  date  usually  assigned  to  Theodotion. 
But  the  Theodotion  type  of  text  was  clearly  familiar  to 
writers  of  an  earlier  date.  Thus  in  Hermas  there  is  one 
undoubted  reference  ( Vis.  iv.  2.  4)  to  Theodotion's  ver- 
sion of  Dan.  vi.  22  and  possibly  two  others  {Mand.  xii. 
4.  I — Dan.  V.  6,  vii.  28,  iii.  19;    Vis.  i.  i.  3 — Dan.  ix.  20). 

But  the  existence  of  Theodotion  readings  before  the 
time  of  Theodotion  is  still  more  clearly  established  by  the 
long  extract  Justin  Martyr  {ob.  circa  165)  gives  in  his 
Dial,  c,  Tryph.  xxxi  from  Dan.  vii.  This  extract,  while 
fundamentally  in  agreement  with  the  LXX,  presents  us 
with  five  distinctively  Theodotion  words  and  phrases,  and 
at  least  as  many  readings  peculiar  to  the  LXX. 

That  this  combination  of  the  two  distinct  types  is  not 
due  to  pure  eclecticism  or  defective  remembrance  on  the 
part  of  Justin  has  been  shown  by  Burkitt  {Old  Lati?i  and 
Itala^  pp.  223  ff.  a\  since  we  find  the  same  admixture  in 
the  Latin  version  in  Tertullian's  reproduction  of  the  same 
passage.  But  earlier  still,  Clement  of  Rome  (i  Cor. 
xxxiv.  6,  circa  A.D.  96)  shows  acquaintance  {iKf^nov^yow — 
LXX  edepdirevov)  with  Theodotion  in  a  citation  from  the 

^  See  Bratke,  Das  neu  entdeckte  4.  Buck  des  Dan.-Comm.  von 
Hippolyt.,  Bonn,  1891. 


INTRODUCTION  xxix 

passage  of  Daniel  just  referred  to,  and  Barnabas  {Ep. 
iv.  5)  recalls  Theodotion's  rendering  of  Dan.  vii.  24  more 
closely  than  that  of  the  LXX. 

But  still  more  memorable  is  the  attestation  given  by 
certain  passages  of  the  N.T.  to  the  existence  of  a  contem- 
porary Theodotion  text.  Thus  Rev.  ix.  20  follows  Theo- 
dotion's rendering  of  Dan.  v.  23,  and  the  dependence 
seems  clear  of  xix.  6,  on  Theodotion's  rendering  of  Dan.  x.  6, 
since  the  LXX  has  here  a  different  phrase.  A  consider- 
able amount  of  strong  evidence  in  the  same  direction  could 
be  advanced  from  the  N.T.,and  from  the  evidence  taken 
as  a  whole  it  is  reasonable  to  conclude  that  there  were  two 
pre-Christian  Greek  versions  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  one 
of  which  was  the  LXX  and  the  other  a  revised  LXX.  For 
the  existence  of  two  such  versions  we  have  a  partial 
analogy  in  the  two  Books  of  Esdras  in  the  LXX.  A 
further  and  better  analogy  to  the  existence  of  two  different 
versions  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  which  in  fact  represent 
in  a  minor  degree  two  recensions  of  that  book,  may  be 
found  in  the  Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs,  of  which 
there  are  two  distinct  Greek  versions,  one  of  which  is 
represented  by  three  MSS.  and  the  other  by  six. 

If  the  scope  of  this  work  admitted  of  it,  we  should  now 
have  to  inquire :  did  these  two  versions  go  back  to 
different  Semitic  originals,  or  did  the  notable  variations 
between  these  two  versions  arise  within  the  Greek  itself? 
But  though  we  cannot  advance  here  the  detailed  evidence 
of  the  Semitic  text  and  of  the  Greek  versions,  we  can  state 
the  conclusions  arrived  at  from  the  above  evidence. 

These  are,  that  if  the  Semitic  text  in  its  present  form  is 
as  old  as  the  Christian  era,  or  even  as  ancient  as  loo  B.C., 
then  there  existed  side  by  side  with  it  another  form  of  the 
Semitic  text,  of  which  the  LXX  version  in  the  Chigi  MS. 
presents  us  with  a  valuable,  though  corrupt  rendering. 
It  is  possible  to  prove  that  the  vast  majority  of  the  cor- 
ruptions in  this  version  can  be  traced  to  a  Semitic  back- 
ground. 


XXX  THE   BOOK   OF   DANIEL 

This  statement  holds  in  regard  to  chapters  i-iii,  vii-xii, 
and  its  cogency  has  been  recognized  to  a  considerable 
extent  by  all  the  foremost  scholars. 

But  with  regard  to  chapters  iv-vi  the  case  is  different. 
Here  the  foremost  scholars  have  in  most  cases  relinquished 
the  study  of  these  chapters  in  despair.  Thus  Bevan 
writes  on  p.  46  :  *  In  chapters  iii-vi . . .  the  original  thread 
of  the  narrative  is  often  lost  in  a  chaos  of  accretions, 
alterations,  and  displacements.' 

This  same  view  is  practically  set  forth  by  Behrmann  on 
pages  XXX  sq.  of  the  introduction  to  his  edition.  Bludau 
{Alexandrinische  Uebersetziing  des  Buches  Daniel^  p.  154, 
1897)  states  as  his  opinion,  after  a  critical  investigation 
of  the  LXX,  that  chapters  iv-vi  are  to  be  named  'a  re- 
vision rather  than  a  translation  ',  and  that  this  verdict  [is 
quoted  with  approval  by  Marti  in  his  edition,  p.  xix. 

But  with  the  above  conclusions  the  present  writer 
cannot  agree.  A  long  sustained  and  minute  study  of  the 
text  and  versions  has  led  him  to  conclude  that  it  is  just  in 
these  chapters  that  the  LXX  makes  its  greatest  con- 
tribution to  the  reconstruction  of  the  original  text,  par- 
ticularly in  chapter  iv.  The  bulk  of  the  evidence  for 
this  conclusion  cannot  of  course  be  given  here,  but  some 
of  the  grounds  are  enumerated  in  the  short  introduction  to 
chapters  iv-vi,  p.  37-39. 

b.  The  Peshitto  Version  belongs  to  the  same  type  of 
versions  as  Theodotion,  and  therefore  agrees  for  the  most 
part  with  the  Massoretic  text.  Of  course  it  diverges  at 
times  from  all  known  authorities,  and  in  one  case  may 
single-handed  represent  the  original,  i.e.  xi.  41. 

c.  The  Syriac  Version  of  Paul  0/  Telia.  This  slavishly 
literal  rendering  of  Origen's  Hexaplaric  text  was  made  at 
Alexandria  in  the  years  616-617  by  Paul  of  Telia.  It  is 
preserved  in  an  eighth-century  MS.,  and  was  published 
by  Bugati  in  1788.  This  Syriac  version  is  of  great  value 
in  the  correction  of  the  Codex  Chisianus.  In  fact,  in 
many  instances  it  attests  an  older  and  purer  form  of  the 


INTRODUCTION  xxxi 

LXX  text.  It  retains  the  critical  signs  introduced  by 
Origen  into  the  text,  i.e.  the  asterisk,  the  obelus,  and  the 
metobelus,  which  have  as  a  rule  been  omitted  or  dis- 
placed in  the  Codex  Chisianus. 

d.  The  Vulgate  Version.  This  version  was  made  in 
the  years  319-405.  It  is  most  closely  related  to  the 
Massoretic  text  and  to  Theodotion.  Sometimes  it  agrees 
with  the  Massoretic  against  Theodotion,  and  sometimes 
conversely,  whilst  in  others  it  seems  to  take  an  independent 
line. 

§  7.  All  Authorities  go  back  to  a  Glossed  Text. 

Though  a  comparison  of  the  versions  of  the  Semitic 
text  enables  us  to  excise  certain  phrases  as  intrusions  in 
the  text,  there  remains  a  number  of  passages  which 
have  the  support  of  all  the  authorities,  but  which  a  study 
of  the  context  forces  us  to  recognize  as  interpolations. 

It  will  be  sufficient  here  to  give  a  list  of  these  passages, 
which  are  dealt  with  as  they  occur  in  the  Commentary. 
Some  of  the  passages  branded  as  glosses  or  additions  in 
the  list  which  follows  are,  it  is  true,  omitted  by  one  or 
more  of  the  versions,  but  a  considerable  number  are 
attested  by  all  the  authorities.  The  evidence  will  be 
found  in  the  notes  on  the  respective  passages. 

Additions  and  Glosses  in  Daniel. 

i.  2.  '  to  the  house  of  his  God  ' — a  gloss  on  '  the  treasure 
house  of  his  God  '  in  next  clause. 
20-21.  An  addition. 

ii.  4.  *  in  Aramaic  '—a  gloss  or  a  corruption  of  *  saying.' 
40.  'and  as  iron  that  crusheth  all  these.'      A   late 
gloss.     Theod.  Pesh.  and  Vulg.  omit. 

iii.  23.  An  otiose  repetition  of  21  b. 

iv.  The  order  of  the  Aramaic  and  of  all  the  versions 
except  the  LXX  is  here  secondary.  Verses  6-9,  a  gloss 
(om.  by  the  LXX). 


xxxii  THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL 

lo  b-i2.  Two  dittographs,  'And  the  height .  .  .  great' 

'  And  in  it  was  meat  for  all ' 
36.  'mine  understanding  returned  to  me' — an  intru- 
sion, being  a  repetition  from  ver.  34. 

V.  II.  'the  king  (I  say)  thy  father' — an  intrusion, 
vi.  4.  '  neither  was  any  error ...  in  him.'     A  dittograph. 
LXX  and  Theod.  omit. 

7.  '  or  man  ' — rightly  omitted  by  LXX. 
12.  '  or  man  '—rightly  omitted  by  LXX. 

15.  Theod.  omits  'assembled  together  unto  the  king 
and '  —  LXX  omits  clause  —  and  transposes  this  verse 
before  13. 

vii.   I.   'told  the  sum  of  the  matters.      Daniel  spake 
and  said '  —(a  gloss  ?). 

5.  '  another  ...  a  second  ' — one  word  a  gloss. 
II.  'I  beheld' — a  gloss. 
1 7.  *  which  are  four ' — a  gloss, 
viii.  21.  '  [rough]  he-goat.' 

24.  *  but  not  by  his  own  power  '—repeated  from  ver.  22. 
ix.  4-19.  An   addition    to  the    text    found    in   all   the 
authorities. 

X.  4.  '  which  is  Hiddekel  '—an  addition. 

8.  '  I  retained  no  strength  ' — an  addition. 

9.  '  with  my  face  '—  LXX  and  Pesh.  omit. 

2i-xi.  2.  Primitive  dislocation  with  corruption  of  the 
text  and  glosses, 
xii.  II,  12.     Glosses. 

§  8.  Textual  Authorities  of  the  Rook  of  Daniel 
AND  their  Relations  represented  in  a  Genea- 
logical Table. 
We  are  now  in  a  position  to  represent  provisionally  the 

affinities  of  the  lost  and  existing  textual  authorities  of  the 

Book  of  Daniel. 


INTRODUCTION 


XXXUl 


Aramaic  (?)  Archetype  of  the  Book  of  Daniel,  165  b.  c. 
Glossed  Text  in  Hebrew  and  Aramaic. 


Semitic  Text  with 

dislocation  of  order 

in  Chapters  IV-VI, 

(xst  cent.  B.C.). 


Semitic  Text  in 
and  cent,  a.d 


LXX,  circ.  145  B.C.* 


Vulgate, 
4th  cent.  A.D. 


Revised  LXX, 
circ.  A.D.  I. 


Peshitto, 
2nd  cent.  a.d. 


Version  of 
Theodotion, 
circ.  A.D.  160. 


Massoretic  Text, 
circ.  A.D.  700. 


Tetraplaric  Text, 
circ.  A.D.  220. 


I  ! 

Chigi  MS.,  Syr.  Version  of 

nth  cent.  Paul  of  Telia, 

A.D.  A.D.  616-617. 


§  9.  Date  of  the  Book. 

As  a  result  of  modern  research  it  is  now  generally 
agreed  amongst  scholars  that  the  Book  of  Daniel  was 
written  in  or  shortly  before  165  B.C.  The  chief  reasons 
for  these  conclusions  are  as  follows  : — 

'  This  date  is  of  course  hypothetical  It  is  a  conclusion 
from  the  fact  that  the  Hellenistic  Jew  who  wrote  tlie  3rd  Book 
of  the  Sibyllines  (circ.  140  B.c.i  refers  to  the  ten  horns  in 
Daniel. 


xxxiv  THE    BOOK   OF   DANIEL 

I.   There  is  no  evidence  in  Jewish  literature  writtefi  before 
190  B.C.  of  the  existence  of  the  Book  of  Daniel. 

1.  The  position  of  the  book  amongst  the  Hagiograplia 
and  not  amongst  the  Prophetical  works  indicates  that  the 
Book  of  Daniel  was  introduced  into  the  Jewish  Canon 
after  the  collection  of  the  Prophets  had  been  closed,  and 
this  was  done  apparently  not  earlier  than  the  third 
century  B.C. 

The  Jewish  Canon  consists  of  three  divisions:  first  the 
Law  or  Pentateuch,  the  first  formal  collection  of  Jewish 
sacred  books  ;  secondly  the  Prophets,  consisting  of  the 
historical  books,  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  Kings,  and  the 
Prophets  properly  so  called,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and 
the  twelve  Minor  Prophets. 

The  exclusion  of  Daniel  from  this  second  division  is 
sufficient  to  prove  that  the  book  did  not  exist  when  the 
Canon  of  the  Prophets  was  completed  *.  It  is  to  be 
observed  also  that  even  in  the  Hagiographa  Daniel  is 
enumerated  near  the  end  after  Esther. 

2.  The  silence  of  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach  (^.190  B.C.) 
touching  Daniel  may  prove  that  Daniel  was  unknown  to 
him.  This  writer,  in  his  list  of  Israel's  worthies,  chapters 
xliv-1,  mentions  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  the 
twelve  Minor  Prophets  collectively,  but  says  not  a  word 
of  Daniel.  If  Daniel  had  been  known  to  him,  with  his 
roll  of  achievements  unparalleled  in  the  O.  T.,  the  writer 
could  hardly  have  said,  as  in  xlix.  15,  that  no  one  had 
ever  been  born  like  unto  Joseph. 

3.  The  oldest  testimofiies  to  the  existence  of  Daniel  belong 
to  the  years  140-107  B.c.^ 

'  Daniel's  use  of  the  phrase  '■the  books'  in  ix.  2  seems  to 
indicate  that  the  prophetic  canon  was  already  closed. 

2  In  the  oldest  section  of  i  Enoch,  i.e.  in  xiv.  18,  19,  22, 
xxi.  5,  there  are  phrases  which  are  found  in  Daniel  vii.  9,  10, 16. 
These  may  be  absolutely  independent  of  each  other,  or  they 
maj'  spring  from  a  common  source.  The  same  no  doubt  holds 
true  of  I  Enoch  Ixxxix.  40  compared  with  Daniel  xi.  16,  41. 


INTRODUCTION  xxxv 

Sibylline s.  In  the  third  book  of  the  Sibyllines,  388-400 
{c.  140  B.C.),  there  is  a  manifest  reference  to  Epiphanes 
and  the  ten  horns  in  Daniel  vii.  7,  20,  24. 

Testaments  of  the  XII  Patriai'chs.  In  this  work,  which 
was  written  probably  109-107  B.C.,  there  are  several  indu- 
bitable references  to  the  text  of  Daniel.  See  my  edition, 
p.  238.  In  I  Maccabees  {c.  100  B.C.),  chapter  ii.  59,  60, 
the  words  assigned  to  the  dying  priest  Mattathias  make 
mention  of  the  miraculous  deliverance  of  Daniel  and  his 
three  companions. 

Thus  from  external  testimony  we  conclude  that  the  Book 
of  Daniel  was  written  between  190-140  B.C.  The  rest  of 
the  evidence  as  to  the  date  rests  on  internal  grounds. 

II.  First,  the  writer's  ijtaccurate  acquaintance  with  the 
events  of  the  exile  and  the  immediately  subsequent 
history  J  secondly ,  his  very  accurate  knoiuledge  of  the 
third  century  B.C.  and  the  first  thirty-three  years  of 
the  second  century  B.C.,  for  which  he  is  accepted 
by  historical  critics  as  a  first-class  authority;  and 
thirdly,  the  vague  generalities  which  ??iark  the  tran- 
sition of  the  nan'ative  as  it  passes  from  the  region  of 
history  into  that  of  prophecy  about  the  years  167-165 
B.C.  These  facts  can  hardly  be  explained  unless  on 
the  ass7cmptio?i  that  the  book  was  written  belwten  the 
years  167-165  B.C. 

The  above  facts  are  manifest  to  eveiy  unbiased  student 
of  the  work,  and  the  proofs  of  these  statements  will  be 
found  in  the  Commentary  in  connexion  with  the  passages 
concerned.  It  follows  as  a  matter  of  course  that  the  author 
should  have  a  more  accurate  acquaintance  with  the  history 
of  his  own  time  than  with  that  of  preceding  centuries.  If 
the  book  were  written  at  the  time  of  the  exile  the  most 
accurate  part  of  the  book  would  be  that  which  dealt  with 
events  from  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar  to  that  of  Cyrus, 
but  this  is  just  the  part  of  the  book  which  is  least  historical. 
The  most  important  inaccuracies  are  as  follows  : — 


xxxvi  THE    BOOK    OF    DANIEL 

(a)  The  transportation  of  Jehoiachim  in  the  third  year  of 
his  reign  :  see  note  on  i.  2. 

(d)  The  use  of  the  term  Chaldeans,  not  in  its  ethnic 
sense,  but  as  denoting  a  learned  class  amongst  the  Baby- 
lonians :  see  note  on  i.  4. 

(c)  The  assumption  that  the  court  language  at  Babylon 
was  Aramaic :  see  note  on  ii.  4  ;  but  the  text  here  may  not 
be  original. 

(^)  The  designation  of  Nebuchadnezzar  as  '  the  king  of 
kings  ' :  see  note  on  ii.  37. 

(e)  The  use  of  the  term  *  satraps  ' :  see  note  on  iii.  2. 
(/)  The  seven  years'  insanity  of  Nebuchadnezzar :  see 

introduction  to  chapter  iv,  p.  38. 

(g)  The  representation  of  Belshazzar  as  son  and  suc- 
cessor of  Nebuchadnezzar  :  see  introduction  to  chapter  v, 
pp.  48  sqq. 

(A)  The  Median  Empire  of  Darius,  who  is  said  to  have 
been  the  sole  and  independent  ruler  of  Babylon  before 
Cyrus :  see  note  on  v.  31. 

From  the  above  facts  it  follows  that  our  author  had  a 
very  inaccurate  knowledge  of  the  history  of  the  Babylonian 
period  as  it  appears  in  the  Cuneiform  records,  and  that 
for  his  knowledge  of  this  period  he  was  indebted  to  con- 
temporary tradition  in  which  the  events  of  Babylonian 
history  often  appear  in  a  distorted  form.  Of  the  Persian 
period  his  knowledge  appears  to  be  scant  if  not  also  un- 
trustworthy :  see  note  on  xi.  2. 

But  when  we  come  down  to  the  Greek  period,  the  case 
is  wholly  different  and  our  author  becomes  here  an  actual 
historical  source.  This  holds  specially  with  the  sections 
that  deal  with  the  Egyptian  campaigns  of  Antiochus 
(xi.  25-39)  and  his  persecution  of  the  Jews.  His  repre- 
sentation of  Antiochus,  who  became  to  aftertimes  the  pro- 
totype of  the  Antichrist,  is  of  extreme  value  ;  he  recounts 
the  desecration  of  the  altar  of  burnt  offering  (Dec.  15, 
168  B.C.  :  he  refers  to  the  Maccabean  revolt  and,  as  he 
designates  it  'a  little  help,'  xi.  34,  he  is  acquainted  with 


INTRODUCTION  xxxvii 

the  first  Maccabean  victories.  He  predicts  the  impending 
death  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  but  with  details  as  to 
place  which  conflicted  with  actual  facts  (see  note  on  xi.  45). 
The  rededication  of  the  Sanctuary,  Dec.  25,  165  B.C.,  was 
to  him  still  in  the  future  (see  note  on  viii.  14). 

The  limits  of  the  date  are  therefore  easy  to  determine. 
The  book  must,  therefore,  have  been  written  before  165  B.C. 
and  after  167  B.  c. ;  for  we  cannot  ascribe  the  victories 
of  Judas  Maccabaeus  over  Apollonius  and  Seron  to  a  later 
date.  These  victories  at  all  events  must  be  in  the  back- 
ground according  to  chapter  xi.  34  ^ 

§  10.   Chronological  Tables 
I.  Neo- Baby  Ionian  Kings  and  Notable  Events. 

B.C. 

Nabopolassar — at  first  a  viceroy  of  Babylon  under 
the  sons  and  successors  of  Assur-bani-pal,  but 
subsequently  the  king  and  independent  ruler 
of  Babylon  on  the  destruction  of  the  Assyrian 
empire  by  the  Medes       ....        625-605 

Nebuchadnezzar,  as  crown  prince,  defeats  the 
Egyptian  forces  at  Carchemish  (Jer.  xlvi.  2)  on 
the  Euphrates  and  recovers  all  Western  Asia  .      605 

Nebuchadnezzar — king  of  the  Chaldaeans  (see  note 

on  this  term,  p.  7)  and  of  Babylon  .         .        604-561 

Amel-Marduk,  i.e.  Evil-Merodach  (2  Kings  xxv.  27 

sqq.),  son  and  successor  of  Nebuchadnezzar   561-559 

'  Other  facts  point  in  the  direction  of  a  late  date.  An 
exilic  date  for  the  book  is  excluded  by  its  use  of  many  words 
derived  from  the  Persian,  these  are  referred  to  in  notes  on 
i-  3.  5.  ii-  5,  6,  9,  18,  iii.  2,  21,  24,  xi.  7,  xi.  45. 

But,  furthermore,  there  are  three  words  borrowed  from  the 
Greek,  see  note  on  iii.  5.  It  is  only  natural  to  assume  that 
these  did  not  obtain  currency  in  the  East  till  after  the  time  of 
Alexander  the  Great, 

Finally,  the  fact,  that  our  author  was  acquainted  with  the 
Book  of  Jeremiah  and  2  Chron.  xxxvi,  see  note  on  i.  i, 
postulates  a  date  not  earlier  than  the  third  century  B.C.,  while 
the  eschatology  demands  a  still  later  period. 


XXXVlll 


THE   BOOK   OF   DANIEL 


B.C. 


Nergal-Sharezer  (Neriglissar),  having  assassinated 

his  brother-in-law  Amel-Marduk,  reigned       559-556 

Labashi-Marduk,  son  of  Nergal-Sharezer,  reigned 
only  nine  months,  being  murdered  by  his 
nobles 55^-555 

Nabuna'id,  the  last  king  of  the  Chaldaeans,  who 
was  not  a  descendant  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  but 
the  son  of  Nabu-balatsu-ikbi,  seized  the  throne 
and  became  king 555*538 

Cyrus,  king  of  Anshan  (558),  overthrows  the 
Median  empire  (550),  becomes  king  of  Persia 
circa  547,  takes  Nabuna'id,  and  makes  himself 
master  of  Babylon,  over  which  Belshazzar, 
son  of  Nabuna'id,  had  been  governor  (?) 

Cyrus  thus  becomes  king  of  Babylon 

Cambyses,  his  son,  becomes  king   . 

Conquers   Egypt    (which    remains   a 
Persia  till  332) 

Darius  I,  Hystaspis,  king  of  Persia 

Xerxes  (=Ahasuerus  in  O.T.) 

Artaxerxes 

Darius  II,  Nothus  . 

Artaxerxes  II,  Mnemon . 


538 
538-529 

•        •         .529 
province  of 


Artaxerxes  III,  Ochus  . 
Darius  III,  Codomanus  . 
Conquered  by  Alexander 

II.   The  earlier  Seleucidae. 
The   Empire   of  the   Seleucidae   over  Syria 
Babylon  founded  by  Seleucus  I,  Nicator 
Antiochus  I,  Soter  . 
Antiochus  II,  Theos 
Seleucus  II,  Callinicus    . 
Seleucus  III,  Ceraunus  . 
Antiochus  III,  the  Great 
Seleucus  IV,  Philopator  . 
Antiochus  IV,  Epiphanes 


•  525 
521-486 
485-465 
465-425 
423-404 

404-359 
359-338 
336-331 
.       331 


and 

312-280 
279-261 
261-246 
246-226 
226-223 
222-187 
186-176 
X75-164 


INTRODUCTION 


XXXIX 


III.   The  earlier  Ptolemies.  B.C. 

Ptolemy  I,  Soter,  became  ruler  of  Egypt  .  322-285 
Ptolemy  II,  Philadelphus  ....  285-247 
Ptolemy  III,  Euergetes  I        .         .         .         .        247-222 

Ptolemy  IV,  Philopator 222-205 

Ptolemy  V,  Epiphanes 205-182 

Ptolemy  [VI],  Eupator 182 

Ptolemy  VI  [VII],  Philometor,  sole  king         .        182-170 
Ptolemy  Philometor  \      .     .  ...      .^^  r^. 

Ptolemy  VII,  Euergetes  II  (  ■'e-gmng  conjomtly    17^164 

Ptolemy  Philometor,  sole  king        .         .         .        164-146 


IV.  Events  in  Jewish  history  from  the  time  of  Jehoiakim 
to  the  death  of  Antiochtis  Epiphanes. 


Jehoiakim  rebels  against  Nebuchadnezzar.  Judea 
laid  waste  by  the  inroads  of  hostile  nations 
including  the  Chaldaeans  (2  Kings  xxiv.  1-4). 
[According  to  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  6,  7  Nebuchad- 
nezzar himself  invades  Judea,  and  carries  off 
Jehoiakim  and  some  of  the  vessels  of  the 
Temple  to  Babylon — a  tradition  thus  existed 
'^  as  early  as  300  B.C.  which  in  part  forms  the 
basis  of  Dan.  i.  i,  2] 

Jehoiakim  carried  captive  to  Babylon  with  all  the 
sacred  vessels  of  the  Temple   .... 

Captivity  of  Zedekiah  and  destruction  of  Jerusalem 

First  return  of  exiles  under  Cyrus   .... 

Second  return  with  Ezra  ..... 

Conquest  of  Palestine  by  Alexander  the  Great 

Struggle  between  Ptolemy  I  and  Antigonus  over 
the  possession  of  Palestine,  which  results  in 
Palestine  becoming  a  province  of  Egypt  for 
nearly  100  years 

The  marriage  of  Antiochus  II  with  Berenice,  the 
daughter  of  Ptolemy  II  (Dan.  xi.  6) 


B.C. 


602 

597 
586 

538 
458 
332 


301 


248 


xl  THE   BOOK   OF   DANIEL 

Fresh  wars  between  Ptolemy  III  and  Seleucus  II      B.C. 
(Dan.  xi.  7  sqq.) 246 

Antiochus  III  makes  himself  master  of  Palestine 
but  is  forced  to  retire  from  it  through  his 
defeat  at  Raphia  by  Ptolemy  IV     .  .       217 

Conquest  of  Palestine  by  Antiochus  111 .         .         .      202 

Despite  the  attempts  of  Egypt  (200  B.  c.)  this  con- 
quest maintained  (Dan.  xi.  13  sqq.).        .         .       198 

Cleopatra,  daughter  of  Antiochus  III,  married  to 

Ptolemy  V  (Dan.  xi.  17) 197 

Seleucus  IV,  acting  on  information  given  by  Simon, 
who  was  at  strife  with  the  H  igh  Priest  Onias  III, 
attempts  to  make  himself  master  of  the  Temple 
treasures  through  his  chief  minister  Heliodorus 
(Dan.  xi.  20) 176 

Accession  of  Antiochus  IV  to  the  throne  of  Syria 

(Dan.  vii.  8,  11,  20,  viii.  9,  23,  xi.  21)       .         .       176 

The  High  Priest,  Onias  III,  leader  of  the  Chasidim, 
deposed  by  Antiochus,  and  his  brother  Jason, 
the  leader  of  the  hellenizing  Jews,  appointed  in 
his  stead 175 

Jason  deposed  in  favour  of  Menelaus  and  Onias  III 
murdered  at  the  instigation  of  the  latter  (Dan. 
ix.  26,  xi.  22,  I  Enoch  xc.  8,  2  Mace.  iv.  33-5)   .       171 

Antiochus  IV  invades  Egypt  in  a  campaign,  the 
first  stage  of  which  ended  with  the  victory 
near  Pelusium,  and  the  second  with  the  con- 
quest of  Egypt  (Dan.  xi.  25-7,  I  Mace.  i.  16- 
19).  Jason  having  in  the  meantime  reinstated 
himself  in  Jerusalem  by  force,  Antiochus  on  his 
return  from  Egypt  expels  him,  plunders  the 
Temple,  and  massacres  many  Jews  (Dan.  viii. 
9^-10,  xi.  28,  I  Mace.  i.  21-28)        .        .        .       170 

Antiochus,  making  his  second  expedition  against 
Egypt,  obliged  to  retire  before  the  Roman 
legate  Popilius  Laenas,and  to  give  up  his  claims 
on  the  country 169 


INTRODUCTION  xli 

Jerusalem  taken  by  surprise  by  Apollonius  on  the  B.  C. 
Sabbath  day,  many  Jews  slaughtered  or  driven 
into  exile,  and  a  Syrian  garrison  established  in 
the  citadel.  The  complete  suppression  of  the 
Jewish  religion  ordered  by  Antiochus.  The 
observance  of  the  Sabbath  and  circumcision 
forbidden.  Books  of  the  Law  burnt,  the  daily 
sacrifice  abolished,  and  a  heathen  altar,  i.e. 
'  The  Abomination  of  Desolation,'  set  up  in 
the  Temple  on  the  15th  of  Chisleu  (December) 
168  (Dan.  vii.  21,  24^,  25,  viii.  il,  12,  13^,  24, 
25,  ix.  26^  27a,  xi.  30^-35,  xii.  i,  7,  il)  .         169-168 

The  revolt  of  the  Jews  against  Antiochus  under 
Mattathias  and  his  sons  (Dan.  xi.  37,  I  Enoch 
xc.  9  sqq.,  I  Mace,  ii) 167 

The  death  of  Mattathias.  Judas  his  son  defeats  and 
slays  the  Syrian  generals  Apollonius  and  Seron 
(l  Mace.  iii.  1-24),  and  subsequently  routs 
Gorgias  at  Emmaus  (I  Mace.  iii.  25-iv.  27),  and 
Lysias  at  Beth-Zur  (i  Mace.  iv.  28-35)  •         166-165 

Recovery  of  Jerusalem,  with  the  exception  of  the 
citadel.  The  cleansing  and  rededication  of  the 
Temple  on  the  25ih  of  Chisleu,  three  years  and 
ten  days  after  its  desecration.  Successful  inva- 
sion of  Edomites,  Ammonites,  Philistines,  and 
other  Gentile  nations  (i  Mace,  v)     .        .        .       165 

Antiochus,  owing  to  lack  of  money,  attempts  to 
pillage  a  temple  in  Elymais  in  Persia,  but  is 
beaten  off  by  the  inhabitants  of  the  town,  and 
soon  afterwards  dies  at  Taboe  in  that  same 
country  (Dan.  vii.  11,  26,  viii.  14^  25,  ix.  26^, 
27^  xi.  45^,  xii.  7,  II,  12)         ...         .164 

§  II.  Theology. 

Although  this  book  is  the  forerunner  and  herald  of 
most  subsequent  apocalyptic  developments,  it  is  not  by 
any  means  the  earliest.     Its  outlook,  moreover,  is  in  the 

D 


xlii  THE   BOOK   OF   DANIEL 

main  contined  to  this  world.  Its  hopes  are  directed, 
not  to  the  after-world,  with  its  retributions  for  the  indivi- 
dual, but  to  the  setting  up  of  a  world-empire  of  Israel 
which  is  to  displace  the  heathen,  to  a  Messianic  kingdom 
on  earth.  Accordingly,  it  extends  neither  promise  nor 
threatening  to  the  individual  as  such^  but  only  to  those 
individuals  who  have  in  an  extraordinary  degree  helped 
or  hindered  the  advent  of  this  kingdom.  To  the  former, 
the  martyrs,  the  great  saints,  and  teachers  (xii.  2^  it 
holds  forth  the  blessedness  of  a  resurrection  to  life ;  to  the 
latter,  the  Jewish  apostate,  it  proclaims  a  resurrection  to 
shame  and  everlasting  contempt,  i.e.  to  Gehenna.  As 
for  the  majority  of  the  nation,  who  are  neither  over-much 
righteous  nor  over-much  wicked,  their  lot  is  of  no  concern 
to  the  kingdom,  and  Sheol  remains  their  eternal  abode. 
Sheol,  which  is  called  the  land  of  dust  ixii.  2),  retains  its 
O.T.  heathen  character  as  a  non-moral  region.  It  thus 
possesses  a  peculiar  character  in  our  author.  It  is  the 
inter7}iediate  abode  of  the  very  good  and  of  the  very  bad 
in  Israel,  and  the  eterttal  abode  of  the  rest  of  Israel  and 
of  all  the  Gentiles.  The  eschatological  outlook  of  the 
individual  is  very  imperfectly  conceived,  or  at  all  events 
very  imperfectly  delineated.  For  we  might  ask,  are  the 
risen  righteous  to  live  for  ever  in  the  Messianic  kingdom  ? 
The  supernatural  character  of  the  kingdom  would  point 
to  this  (cf.  vii.  17,  18),  and  yet  the  description  in  vii.  17, 
where  the  continued  existence  of  *  the  peoples,  nations, 
and  languages'  as  subject  to  this  kingdom  is  difficult  to 
reconcile  with  the  immortality  of  the  individual  righteous 
upon  the  earth,  though  it  is  quite  reconcilable  with  the 
eternity  of  the  Messianic  kingdom. 

We  have,  however,  overlooked  the  manner  in  which  the 
kingdom  is  to  be  introduced.  It  is  to  be  catastrophic. 
When  evil  reaches  its  culmination,  and  the  need  of  the 
saints  is  greatest  (vii.  21,  22,  xii.  i),  when  the  Antichrist 
in  the  person  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  is  warring  down 
the  saints,  God  Himself  will  intervene,  and  the  throne  of 


INTRODUCTION  xliii 

judgement  be  set  up  (vii.  9},  and  the  world  powers  over- 
thrown (vii.  II,  12),  and  the  kingdom  of  the  saints  shall 
be  set  up,  which  shall  break  in  pieces  and  consume  all 
the  kingdoms  of  the  world  and  make  them  subject  (ii.  44), 
and  all  the  surviving  nations  shall  serve  them.  It  is  to 
this  kingdom  that  the  righteous,  of  whom  we  have  already 
spoken,  shall  rise. 

The  writer  of  this  book  uses  the  be)ief  in  the  angelic 
patrons  of  the  nations  to  explain  the  national  reverses, 
and  likewise  the  delay  in  the  establishment  of  the  Mes- 
sianic kingdom.  Persia  has  its  angelic  guardian  (x.  13, 
20),  and  likewise  Greece  (x.  20),  while  the  patron  angel 
of  Israel  is  Michael  (x.  21,  xii.  i). 

The  writer's  use  of  this  conception  implies  that  the 
real  successes  and  reverses  of  Israel  are  already  achieved 
in  heaven  according  to  the  varying  fortunes  of  the  angelic 
encounters.  It  is  difficult  to  reconcile  this  conception 
with  that  of  the  triumphant  kingdom  of  the  saints  and 
the  final  judgement  executed  by  God  in  chapter  vii.  26. 

Attention  might  be  called  to  the  following  points :  The 
trequent  condemnation  of  idolatry  in  chapters  iii  and  v,  the 
rules  as  to  clean  and  unclean  food  (i.  8-16),  the  giving  of 
alms  and  good  works  (iv.  27),  the  Bath-Kol  (iv.  31),  or  voice 
from  heaven  (iv.  28),  the  three  hours  of  prayer  (vi.  lo). 

§  12.  Bibliography. 
During  the  first  eighteen  centuries  of  the  Christian  era 
the  authenticity  and  integrity  of  the  Book  of  Daniel  were 
assumed  as  a  matter  of  course,  except  in  the  twelfth  Book  of 
Porphyry's  Treatise  against  the  Christians  (KaTaXpia-Tiafiov). 
Porphyry  was  a  neo-l'latonic  philosopher,  and  lived  about 
the  years  A.D.  233-304.  One  division  of  this  work  was 
intended  to  prove  that  the  Book  of  Daniel  was  written  by 
a  Palestinian  Jew  in  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 
He  pointed  out  that  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  are  a  correct 
record  of  events  till  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  but 
from  that  date  onwards  they  were  simply  guesses.     This 

D  a 


xliv  THE   BOOK   OF   DANIEL 

theory  of  Porphyry  was  in  the  opinion  of  his  contemporaries 
and  of  subsequent  generations  so  successfully  refuted  by 
the  counter-treatises  of  Jerome,  Methodius,  Eusebius  of 
Caesarea,  and  Apollinaris,  that  it  was  not  fully  revived 
till  the  nineteenth  century.  In  the  eighteenth  century 
Sir  Isaac  Newton  in  a  work  on  Daniel  and  Revelation 
expressly  states  that  to  reject  Daniel's  prophecies  '  is  to 
reject  the  Christian  religion.'  It  is  true,  however,  that 
Collins  {The  Scheme  of  Literal  Prophecy  consideted,  1726) 
argued  for  the  Maccabean  date  of  the  book,  but  apparently 
for  the  time  without 'result. 

The  first  serious  work  to  do  justice  to  the  historical 
problems  of  the  book  was  that  of  Bertholdt  {Datneliieu 
ubersetzt  tmd e?'kiarf ) .  His  hypothesis,  however,  ofseveral 
distinct  authors  drew  upon  him  the  adverse  criticism  of 
Gesenius,  Bleek,  and  DeWette,  who,  however,  accepted  the 
Maccabean  date. 

Since  the  time  of  the  last-mentioned  works  practically 
all  the  foremost  scholars  have  maintained  the  unity  of 
the  work,  and  at  the  same  time  its  Maccabean  date. 
The  upholders,  of  course,  of  ecclesiastical  tradition 
laboured  hard  to  maintain  the  asserted  early  date  of 
the  work.  The  chief  writers  of  this  class  during  the 
nineteenth  century  were  Hengstenberg,  Havernick,  Auber- 
len,  and  in  our  own  country  Pusey.  These  and  subse- 
quent scholars,  not  only  of  this  school  but  of  their  oppo- 
nents, laboured  under  a  complete  misapprehension  of  the 
nature  of  the  Apocalyptic.  This  appears  in  all  their 
works,  as  the  following  passage  from  Pusey  typical  of  the 
orthodox  school  amply  proves  :  '  The  Book  of  Daniel  .  .  . 
is  either  divine  or  an  imposture.  To  write  any  book 
under  the  name  of  another,  and  to  give  it  out  to  be  his, 
is,  in  any  case,  a  forgery,  dishonest  in  itself,  and  destruc- 
tive of  all  trustworthiness.  But  the  case  as  to  the  Book 
of  Daniel,  if  it  were  not  his,  would  go  far  even  beyond 
this.  The  writer,  were  he  not  Daniel,  must  have  lied  on 
a  most  frightful  scale,  ascribing  to  God  prophecies  which 


INTRODUCTION  xlv 

were  never  uttered.  ...  In  a  word,  the  whole  book  would 
be  one  lie  in  the  name  of  God.'     See  §  3. 

But  the  ultra  standpoint  of  Pusey  was  not  maintained 
by  all  the  so-called  defenders  of  Daniel,  and  a  whole 
series  of  writers  adopted  an  intermediate  course,  and 
sought  to  reconcile  the  statements  of  the  text  with  the 
results  of  historical  criticism.  The  latest  representative  of 
this  school  has  been  C.  H.  H.  Wright. 

The  chief  Commentaries  for  the  last  sixty  years  have 
been  :  F.  Hitzig  (in  the  Kgf.  Handb.),  1850 ;  H.  Ewald  in 
Die  Proph.  des  AB.s"^  (1886),  iii.  298  ff.  (in  transl. ,  v.i  52  ff.); 
E.  B.  Pusey,  Daniel  the  Prophet^,  1869;  Keil,  1869; 
O.  Zockler,  1869 ;  Fuller  in  the  Speaker's  Commentary y 
1876;  Meinhold,  1889;  Bevan,  1892  (very  original); 
Behrmann,  1894;  Farrar  {Expositor's  Bibie),  1895; 
Prince,  1899;  Driver  {Cambridge  Bible),  1900  (very 
learned) ;  Marti,  1901  ;  Jahn,  Das  Buck  Daniel  nachder 
Septuaginta  hergestellt,  1904 — a  suggestive  but  very 
extravagant  work  ;  C.  H.  H.  Wright,  Daniel  audits  Critics 
and  Daniel  and  his  Prophecies,  1906. 

Special  treatises  and  articles  :  Cornill,  '  Die  siebzig 
Jahrwochen  Daniels'  in  Theol.  Stud.  u.  Skizzen,  1889; 
Kamphausen,  Das  Bitch  Daniel  und  die  neuere  Ge- 
schichtsforschung,  1893  ;  Von  Gall,  Die  Einheitlichkeit 
des  Buches  Daniely  1895. 

The  Versions :  Bludau,  Die  Alexandrinische  Uber- 
setzung  des  Buches  Daniel  und  ihr  Verhdltniss  zwn 
Massorethischefi  Text,  1 897.  This  is  a  valuable  contribu- 
tion. A  very  much  slighter  work  with  a  few  good  sugges- 
tions is  Riessler^s  Das  Buch  Daniel,  1899 

Besides  the  above  works  the  reader  will  find  valuable 
material  in  the  O.  T.  introductions  of  Driver,  Cornill, 
Konig,  &c.  A  very  full  bibliography  covering  the  whole 
field  is  to  be  found  in  C.  H.  H.  Wright,  Daniel  and  its 
Critics,  pp.  xviii-xxxvii. 


THE   BOOK   OF   DANIEL 

REVISED  VERSION  WITH  ANNOTATIONS 


4  DANIEL  1.  3 

a  salem,  and  besieged  it.     And  the  Lord  gave  Jehoiakim 
king  of  Judah  into  his  hand,  with  part  of  the  vessels  of 

chadnezzar,  did  not  die  till  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  (Jer.  xxv. 
1,  xlvi.  a),  the  title  here  is  used  proleptically. 

2.  This  verse  is  in  part  interpolated.  The  contextual  evidence 
is  against  tlie  originality  of  the  phrase  (i)  'to  the  house  of  his 
god '  (see  note  inloc),  or  rather  against  that  of  (2)  '  to  the  house 
of  his  god  and  the  vessels.'  The  Syro-hexaplaric  Syriac  marks  the 
latter  as  an  addition  :  the  Chigi  MS.  might  be  quoted  in  favour 
of  either  view,  but  really  supports  Syr.**.  Hence  the  textual  evi- 
dence here  supports  the  contextual  evidence.  But  accordingly 
as  we  accept  (i)  or  (3)  the  resulting  form  of  the  text  will  vary 
considerably.     Let  us  with  Marti  (and  Driver)  consider  (i)  first. 

(i)  If  only  the  words  *  to  the  house  of  his  god'  are  interpolated 
then  the  text  is  defective,  for  the  last  clause,  which  should  be  trans- 
lated 'and  as  for  the  vessels  he  brought  (them)  into  the  treasure 
house  of  his  god,'  implies  that  the  text  originally  contained  a  refer- 
ence to  the  captives  (some  of  whom  are  actually  specified  in 
vcr.  3)  and  the  booty  carried  off  by  Nebuchadnezzar.  Hence  the 
verse  should  be  rendered  as  follows,  the  clause  in  brackets  being 
of  course  a  purely  hypothetical  restoration  (by  Ewald; :  '  And  the 
Lord  gave  Jehoiakim  king  of  Judah  into  his  hand  {and  the  noblest 
of  the  land)  and  part  of  the  vessels  of  the  house  of  God  ;  and  he 
carried  them  into  the  land  of  Shinar.  And  as  for  the  vessels  he 
brought  (them)  into  the  treasure  house  of  his  god.'  The  last 
clause  of  this  verse  tells  what  the  king  did  with  the  vessels  of  the 
Temple:  the  next  two  verses  give  the  king's  commands  with 
regard  to  some  of  the  noblest  of  the  captives. 

(a)  If  the  larger  phrase  is  an  interpolation  the  problem  is  less 
complex.  We  should  then  translate:  'And  the  Lord  gave 
Jehoiakim  king  of  Judah  into  his  hand,  and  part  of  the  vessels  of 
the  house  of  God  ;  and  he  carried  them  into  the  land  of  Shinar, 
^and)  he  brought  them  into  the  treasure  house  of  his  god.'  In 
this  case  the  writer  concerns  himself  wholly  with  the  overthrow 
of  the  king  and  the  deportation  of  the  sacred  vessels  to  Babylon, 
as  I  Esdras  i.  40,  41,  45,  54,  ii.  10,  vi.  18,  a6,  a  Chron.  xxxvi.  7, 
although  other  captives  and  booty  must  have  been  taken.  These 
parallel  accounts  undoubtedly  support  this  shorter  form  of  the 
text. 

tli«  Lord,  i.  e.  Adonai.  This  designation  of  God  is  used  only 
here  and  in  ch.  ix.  3  (note). 

with  part  of  tlia  vessels.  Nebuchadnezzar  raided  the 
Temple  three  times  :  first  in  Jehoiakim's  reign,  when  he  took  part 
of  the  vessels  (a  Cliron.  xxxvi.  7"^,  as  in  our  text  ;  secondly,  in 
Jehoiachin's  reign  (a  Chron.  xxxvi.  10);  and  finally  in  Zedekiah's 


DANIEL  1.  a  JJ 

the  house  of  God ;  and  he  carried  them  into  the  land 
of  Shinar  to  the  house  of  his  god :  and  he  brought  the 

reign  (ibid,  xxxvi.  18-19).  In  a  Kings  xxiv.  sq.  there  is  no 
mention  of  the  king  taking  the  sacred  vessels  of  the  Temple  in 
Jehoiakim's  reign,  though  his  plundering  of  the  Temple  and  Jeru- 
salem in  Jehoiachin's  reign  is  recounted  at  length  in  xxiv.  ia-i6. 

the  house  of  God.  This  is  the  usual  name  for  the  Temple  in 
post-exilic  writers,  but  it  is  once  applied  to  the  sanctuary  in 
Shiloh  (Judg.  xviii.  31).  In  the  earlier  books  the  expression 
*  house  of  Yahweh  '  was  always  used.  Our  text  avoids  the  use 
of  this  divine  name,  as  do  other  late  books. 

carried  them.  If  we  retain  the  words  'the  vessels'  in  the 
following  clause,  the  pronoun  here  must  embrace  not  onlj'  the 
vessels,  but  the  captives  and  all  the  booty  taken  by  Nebuchad- 
nezzar. If  we  refer  it  only  to  the  Temple  vessels  we  cannot 
explain  the  words  *  the  vessels '  in  the  next  clause.  Instead  of 
'the  vessels  '  we  should  have  expected  only  'them.*  Moreover, 
these  words  are  placed  in  the  most  emphatic  position  in  the 
clause,  '  and  as  for  the  vessels  he  brought,  &c.'  If,  then,  the  words 
'  the  vessels '  are  original  and  in  their  original  position,  this  clearly 
implied  that  something  other  than  vessels,  i.e.  captives.  &c.,  was 
dealt  with  in  the  preceding  clause.  But,  if  with  Syr."  and  the 
LXX  we  reject  them,  then  the  pronoun  refers  only  to  the  sacred 
vessels. 

into  the  land  of  Bhinar.  Shinar,  or  rather  Shin'ar,  is 
mentioned  eight  times  :  Gen.  x.  10,  xi.  a,  xiv.  i,  9,  Joshua  vii.  21, 
Isa.  xi.  II,  Zech.  v.  11,  Dan.  i.  a,  and  stands  for  Babylon  in  the 
O.T.  It  has  not,  however,  been  found  in  the  Inscriptions. 
Various  attempts  at  its  identification  will  be  found  in  the  Bible 
Dictionaries.  The  word  is  an  archaism.  In  the  LXX  the  words 
'  to  Babylon '  are  inserted.  They  may  be  an  explanatory  gloss  (?). 
In  exilic  times  and  later  writers  spoke  of  Babylonia  as  '  the  land 
of  Babylon,'  Jer.  li.  29,  or  'the  land  of  the  Chaldeans,'  Ezek.  xii. 
13.  The  LXX  here  reads  '  to  Babylon,  to  the  land  of  Shinar,' 
and  Syr.^  '  to  Babylon.' 

[to  the  house  of  his  ifod.]  This  phrase  was  omitted  in  the 
LXX,  as  is  clear  from  the  evidence  of  the  LXX  and  the  Syr.**. 
The  context  also  is  against  its  genuineness,  as  Marti  and  Driver 
recognize,  though  the  latter  admits  it  to  be  possible.  The  captives 
and  the  booty  in  general  were  not  placed  in  the  heathen  temple. 
Marti  takes  the  phrase  to  be  a  gloss  on  the  words  'the  treasure 
house  of  his  god  '  in  the  next  clause,  which  was  subsequently 
transposed  wrongly  into  its  present  position.  See  note  on  *  the 
treasure  house  of  his  god.* 

and  he  brought  the  vessels.     Read  '  and  as  for  the  vessels 


6  DANIEL  1.  3,4 

3  vessels  into  the  treasure  house  of  his  god.  And  the  king 
spake  unto  Ashpenaz  the  master  of  his  eunuchs,  that  he 
should  bring  in  certain  of  the  children  of  Israel,  even  of 

4  the  seed  royal  and  of  the  nobles ;  youths  in  whom  was 


he  brought  (them) ' — that  is,  if  we  follow  the  Massoretic  text. 
But  it  is  best  to  read  with  the  LXX:  'and  he  set  them  up'  {kuI 
anT]pfi(raTo  avTo).  The  Greek  verb  in  the  LXX  occurs  three  times 
in  I  Esdras  i.  41,  ii.  10,  vi.  18  in  this  very  same  connexion.  The 
parallel  passages  in  the  O.T,  to  these  passages  are  respectively 
2  Chron.  xxxvi.  7,  Ezra  i.  7,  v.  14. 

into  the  treasure  house  of  his  g'od.  The  statement  in  our 
text  is  confirmed  by  Ezra  i.  7,  v.  14,  i  Esdras  i.  41,  ii.  ib,  vi.  18  :  but 
the  Oxford  Hebrew  Lexicon  states  that  in  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  7  hekal 
is  to  be  rendered  *  palace '  and  not  *  temple.'  But  the  LXX 
renders  it  naos  ( =  '  temple '),  and  carries  with  it  the  entire  tradi- 
tion connected  with  the  question. 

3-5.  Nebuchadnezzar  commands  Ashpenaz  to  have  educated 
for  the  king's  service  certain  youths;  of  the  Jewish  captivity,  belong- 
ing both  to  the  royal  family  and  the  nobility. 

3.  spake  unto,  rather  *  commanded,'  as  in  ver.  18,  The 
Hebrew  word  is  Hterally  *  said.' 

Ashpenaz.  So  also  Theodotion,  In  Jos.  Anf,  x.  10.  2  the 
name  appears  as  '  Aschanes'  ('Ao'xaj'T^s).  No  explanation  of  this 
name  has  yet  been  given  by  Ass3'riologists.  It  is  probably  corrupt. 
The  LXX  gives  '  Abiesdri '  {'AfiitaSpi).  The  d  is  here  parasitic,  as 
in  '  Esdras.'  Hence  '  Abiezer,' which  is  preserved  in  Syr.*^,  is  the 
form  presupposed  by  the  LXX. 

master  of  his  eunuchs.  The  expression  rab  san'sim  here 
instead  of  say  sarisitn,  'prince  of  the  eunuchs,'  as  in  verses  7,  11, 
is  characteristic  of  later  Hebrew.  Eunuchs  were  employed  in 
Oriental  courts  as  the  chief  officers  of  the  king.  But  the  word 
saris  does  not  always  mean  eunuch.  We  might  compare  the  title 
'Rabsaris'  in  a  Kings  xviii.  17. 

children  of  Israel.  We  should  probably  with  the  LXX 
read  *  children  of  the  princes  of  Israel.'  Theod.  presupposes  a 
text  that  is  a  corruption  of  the  original  of  the  LXX. 

even  of  the  seed  royal.  This  rendering  'even  of  the  seed 
royal '  implies  that  both  the  members  of  the  royal  family  and 
the  nobles  were  Israelites,  which  seems  right. 

nobles.  The  Hebrew  parfniint,  found  elsewhere  in  the 
O.T.  in  Esther  i.  3,  vi.  9,  is  probably  a  Persian  loan-word  :  cf. 
/ratama  ^  'first'  :  and  the  Sanskrit  prathavna.  rrpoJTos  is  akin 
philologically  to  these  words. 


DANIEL  1.  5  7 

no  blemish,  but  well  favoured,  and  skilful  in  all  wisdom, 
and  cunning  in  knowledge,  and  understanding  science, 
and  such  as  had  ability  to  stand  in  the  king's  palace; 
and  that  he  should  teach  them  the  learning  and  the 
tongue  of  the  Chaldeans.     And  the  king  appointed  for  5 

4.  no  blemish.  The  perfection  here  asserted  is  physical,  as 
in  Lev.  xxi.  17.     Such  perfection  could  not  belong  to  eunuchs. 

cunning'.     This  is  simply  an  archaism  for  '  knowing.' 

science.     The  word  madda'  is  borrowed  from  the  Aramaic, 
but  is  found  also  in  Chronicles  and  Ecclesiastes. 

learning*.      Render    '  literature,'    as    also    in    i.    17.      The 
Hebrew  is  sepher.     Both  Greek  versions  render  ypafifxaTa. 

the  tongue  of  the  Chaldaeans.  The  term  'Chaldaeans' 
(^Hebrew,  Kasdim  :  Greek  XaXSaioi)  has  two  meanings  in  Daniel. 
1°.  //  has  an  ethnic  significonce  in  v.  30,  ix.  i.  The  Chaldaeans 
are  frequently  referred  to  in  the  Inscriptions  from  the  ninth 
century  onwards.  They  lived  originally  to  the  SE.  of  Babylonia 
proper  in  the  land  of  Kaldu,  bordering  on  the  Persian  Gulf 
Strabo  xvi.  i.  6\  Being  a  vigorous  nation  they  pressed  steadily 
inland  into  Bab3'lonia,  and  despite  their  repeated  defeats  by  the 
Assyrians  they  so  far  gained  the  upper  hand  as  to  make  a  tem- 
porary- conquest  of  Babylon  under  Merodach-baladan  in  721.  For 
the  next  hundred  years  the  Chaldaeans  and  Assyrians  were 
constantly  at  war  and  it  was  not  till  the  reign  of  Nabopolassar 
1,625-605),  the  father  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  that  the  Chaldaean 
dynasty  was  firmly  established  in  Babylon.  This  dynasty  held 
the  throne  till  the  conquest  of  Babylon  under  Cyrus  in  538  B.  c. 

For  this  ethnic  use  of  the  term  compare  Isa.  xliii.  14,  xlviii.  14, 
20,  Jer.  xxi.  9,  Ezek.  xxiii.  14,  15,  2  Chron.  xxxvi.  17. 

2°.  //  denotes  a  caste  of  wise  men  in  i.  4,  ii.  2,  4,  5,  10,  iv.  7, 
V.  7,  II,  and  probably  in  iii.  8.  As  the  Chaldaean  became  syno- 
nymous ethnically  with  the  Babylonian  from  the  time  of  Nabo- 
polassar, so  after  the  Persian  conquest  the  term  began  to  be 
a  designation  of  the  Babylonian  literati  and  a  synonym  for 
soothsayer,  magician,  astronomer,  and  astrologer.  Of  this  meaning 
of  the  word  there  is  not  a  trace  in  the  Inscriptions :  it  is  first 
found  in  Herod,  i.  181,  183  (fifth  century  B.  c).  In  Strabo  xvi. 
I.  6  (first  century  e.g.)  the  Chaldaeans  are  mentioned  in  both 
meanings  of  the  term  :  first  as  a  tribe  living  in  the  ancient  home  of 
the  race  on  the  Persian  Gulf,  and  secondly  as  a  class  of  learned 
men  who  lived  in  a  certain  quarter  reserved  for  them  in  Babylon 
and  devoted  themselves  to  the  study  of  astronomy.  A  fuller 
account  is  given  in  Diodorus  Siculus  ii.  29,  which  describes  them 
as  priests,  wise  men,  diviners,  astrologers,  and  magicians.     But 


S  DANIEL  1.  6,  7 

them  a  daily  portion  of  the  king's  «  meat,  and  of  the  wine 
which  he  drank,  and  that  they  should  be  nourished  three 
years ;  that  at  the  end  thereof  they  might  stand  before 

6  the  king.     Now  among  these  were,  of  the  children  of 

7  Judah,  Daniel,  Hananiah,  Mishael,  and  Azariah.     And 

*  Or,  dainties 

though  this  meaning  of  the  term  Chaldaean  was  comparatively 
late  in  origin,  the  practice  of  divination  and  astrology,  such  as  our 
text  refers  to  the  Chaldaeans,  belongs  to  the  earliest  antiquit}'. 
That  the  study  of  dreams  and  their  interpretation  had  been 
elaborated  as  early  as  3000  b.  c.  has  been  shown  by  King  {Hist,  oj 
Sumer  and  Akkad,  1910,  pp.  124,  266).  In  2800  b.c.  divination 
by  oil  was  practised,  and  the  observation  of  omens  in  the  later 
Sumerian  period.  *  The  texts  relating  to  soothsaying  and  exor- 
cism are  so  exceedingly  numerous  as  to  form  the  chief  component 
of  the  whole  Babylonian  religious  literature '  (Zimmern  in 
Hastings,  DRE.,  ii.  316).  Thus  the  Chaldaean  wise  men  of  Babylon 
simply  took  over  the  functions  of  the  priestly  soothsayers,  diviners, 
and  astrologers  which  had  been  practised  in  Babylonia  from 
prehistoric  times.  On  the  names  given  to  the  various  members 
of  this  caste  see  the  note  on  ii.  2. 

5.  a  daily  portion  of  the  kiug''s  meat  (or  'dainties').  A 
yearly  portion  is  mentioned  in  1  Kings  x.  25,  2  Chron.  ix.  24.  The 
word  rendered  'dainties'  is  a  Persian  loan-word,  patibaga,  signi- 
fying 'portion,'  'offering,'  from  the  Ssinskrit  praii-bhdga.  This 
word  was  transliterated  into  Greek  as  Tror/iSa^ty,  which,  according 
to  a  fragment  of  Dinon's  Persica  (c.  340  B.C.),  preserved  in 
Athenaeus  xi.  503,  consisted  of  a  meal  of  barley  or  wheaten  cakes 
and  wine. 

three  years.  According  to  Plato,  A/k.  i.  §  37,  the  education 
of  the  chosen  youths  under  the  royal  teachers  began  at  the  age 
of  fourteen.  For  the  previous  seven  years  they  had  been  trained 
to  ride  and  hunt.  At  the  age  of  seventeen  they  entered  the  king's 
service  (Xen.  Cyr.  i.  2% 

they  luigrht  stand  before  the  king,  i.  e.  serve  him.  Cf. 
ver.  19,  Deut.  i.  38,  &c.  But  the  text  of  the  LXX  seems  pre- 
ferable :  '  that  he  might  present  them  before  the  king.'  Not  until 
they  had  been  approved  by  the  king  were  they  admitted  to  his 
service. 

6-7.  These  verses  introduce  the  four  young  nobles  of  the 
tribe  of  Judah  with  whom  the  following  narratives  are  mainlj' 
concerned. 

6.  Daniel.    Three   other  Daniels  are   mentioned  in  the  OT.  : 


DANIEL  1.  8  9 

the  prince  of  the  eunuchs  gave  names  unto  them :  unto 
Daniel  he  gave  the  ?iame  of  Belteshazzar ;  and  to  Ha- 
naniah,  <?/ Shadrach ;  and  to  Mishael,  ^  Meshach  ;  and 
to  Azariah,  of  Abed-nego.     But  Daniel  purposed  in  his  8 

i"  the  Patriarch  in  Ezek.  xiv.  14,  20,  xxviii.  3,  who,  from  his 
juxtaposition  with  Noah  and  Job,  cannot  be  the  Daniel  of  our 
narrative  who  was  a  mere  boy  at  the  time  of  the  Exile ;  a°  a  son 
of  David,  i  Chron.  iii.  i  ;  3°  a  certain  Levite,  Ezra  viii.  2, 
Neh.  X.  6. 

Mishael.  This  name  (see  Exod.  vi.  22,  Lev.  x.  4),  which 
signifies  'who  is  what  God  is,'  is  identical  in  meaning  with 
Michael. 

7.  It  was  not  unusual  for  the  names  of  individuals  to  be  changed 
on  the  occasion  of  some  change  in  their  position  or  circumstances. 
See  Gen.  xli.  45,  Ruth  i.  20,  a  Kings  xxiii.  34,  xxiv.  17,  and 
especially  Acts  xiii.  9. 

he  gave.     Better  omit  with  the  two  Greek  versions. 

Belteshazzar.  This  name,  which  recurs  in  ii.  26,  iv.  8,  9, 
18,  19,  V.  12,  x.  1,  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  Belshazzar  in  v.  i 
(where  see  note)  as  is  done  in  the  LXX,  Theod.,  and  Vulgate. 
Belteshazzar  ^  balatsu-usnr,  'protect  his  life.'  The  wrong  vocali- 
zation led  to  the  finding  of  the  name  of  Bel  in  this  proper  name. 
See  iv.  8, 

Shadraoh.  This  name  is  said  by  F.  Delitzsch  to  be  the 
equivalent  of  Shudur-aku,  'the  command  of  Aku,'  i.  e.  the  moon- 
deity  Sin.     Jahn  thinks  that  it  is  corrupt  for  '  Marduk.' 

Meshach.  The  explanation  of  this  word  by  F.  Delitzsch  is 
not  very  probable.  He  regards  it  as  a  hybrid  word  partly  of 
Hebrew  and  partly  of  Babylonian  origin,  Mi-sha-Akju,  '  who 
is  what  Aku  is.'    With  this  we  might  compare  Mishael  in  ver.  6. 

Abed-nego,  a  corruption  of  '  Abed-nebo,'  'servant  of  Nebo.' 
The  more  usual  form  would  be  'Amel-Nebo,'  but  'Abed'  or 
'  Abd  '  is  found,  as  a  glance  at  the  index  in  Schrader's  A'^7'.' 
will  prove.  Bevan  notes  that  long  after  the  Christian  era  '  this 
name  was  borne  by  heathen  Syrians  (^Cureton's  Atjcient  Syriac 
Docuntents,  p.  14  of  the  Syriac  text,  line  5). 

8-16.  Loyalty  of  Daniel  and  his  companions  to  their  religion, 
and  their  consequent  superiority  physically  to  the  other  youths 
that  were  being  educated  with  a  view  to  the  king's  service. 

8-10.  The  loyalty  of  Daniel  and  his  companions  was  shown  in 
their  observance  of  the  laws  of  their  religion  regarding  clean  and 
unclean  meats.  The  need  of  this  loyalty  was  felt  to  be  of  supreme 
moment  in  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  who  was  exerting 
all  his  power  to  hellenize  the  Jews.     To  eat  of  unlawful  food  in 


lo  DANIEL  1.  9,  10 

heart  that  he  would  not  defile  himself  with  the  king's 
meat,  nor  with  the  wine  which  he  drank :  therefore  he 
requested  of  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs  that  he  might  not 

9  defile  himself.  Now  God  made  Daniel  to  find  favour 
and  compassion  in  the  sight  of  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs. 

10  And  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs  said  unto  Daniel,  I  fear 
my  lord  the  king,  who  hath  appointed  your  meat  and 
your  drink :  for  why  should  he  see  your  faces  worse 
liking  than  the  youths  which  are  of  your  own  age  ?  so 


such  circumstances  was  as  sinful  as  idolatry  itself.  Hence  the 
faithful  had  to  abstain  from  the  food  of  the  heathen,  not  only 
because  the  Levitical  laws  as  to  clean  and  unclean  animals  were 
not  observed  by  the  heathen  in  the  selection  and  preparation  of 
their  food,  but  also  because  the  food  so  prepared  may  have  been 
offered  in  sacrifice  to  idols  (Exod.  xxxiv.  15,  Acts  xv.  29,  xxi.  25 : 
also  V.  4  in  our  text,  Deut.  xxxii.  38).  Thus  the  observance  of  these 
laws,  though  seen  later  to  be  only  of  temporary  obligation,  became 
an  arliailns  ecclesiae  siantis  aitt  cadeniis  under  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
(i  Mace.  i.  47,  48,  62,  63,  2  Mace.  vi.  i8sqq.,  vii.  i\  Hence  in 
our  text  Daniel  and  his  friends  confined  themselves  to  vegetable 
products  But  generally  in  heathen  surroundings  these  laws  were 
rigidly  carried  out  by  the  faithful  Jew  ;  cf.  Tobit  i.  10,  11,  Judith 
xii.  I,  2,  Vita  loseph.  3.  In  this  last  passage  it  is  told  how  certain 
priests  that  were  sent  to  Rome  limited  their  food  on  religious 
grounds  to  figs  and  nuts. 

8.  purposed  in  his  heart.     Cf.  Isa.  Ivii.  i,  11. 

9.  Ood  made  Daniel  to  find  .  .  .  compassion,  &c.  Practically 
the  same  diction  is  found  in  i  Kings  viii.  50.  Neh.  i.  n,  Ps.  cvi.  46. 
This  verse  explains  the  kindness  of  the  Chief  Eunuch. 

10.  for  why.  The  Aramaism  here  (cf.  Ezra  vii.  23  and  the 
Syriac  dalmd)  should  be  rendered  '  lest '  as  in  the  two  Greek 
versions. 

worse  liking".  The  Hebrew  word  zo'aphtm  is  used  elsewhere 
in  the  O.T.  in  the  sense  of  mental  dejection  (Gen.  xl.  6.  Prov.  xix.  3, 
2  Chron.  xxvi.  I9^.  So  also  the  cognate  adjective  i  Kings  xx.  43. 
Theod.  renders  it  here  by  aKv9pojira.  (cf.  Matt.  vi.  16).  But  the  LXX 
and  Josephus,  Aut.  x.  10.  2,  presuppose  a  different  Hebrew  word 
altogether,  and  possibly  rightl}'. 

aye.  The  word  gil  is  borrowed  from  the  Aramaic  and  corre- 
sponds to  the  Hebrew  dor.  It  is  found  in  the  Samaritan  of 
Gen.  vi.  9,  xv.  16  and  in  the  Talmud. 


DANIEL  1.  11-17  II 

should  ye  endanger  my  head  with  the  king.     Then  said  n 
Daniel  to  ^  the  steward,  whom  the  prince  of  the  eunuchs 
had   appointed  over    Daniel,    Hananiah,    Mishael,   and 
Azariah  :  Prove  thy  servants,  I  beseech  thee,  ten  days;  12 
and  let  them  give  us  ^' pulse  to  eat,  and  water  to  drink. 
Then  let  our  countenances  be  looked  upon  before  thee,  13 
and  the  countenance  of  the  youths  that  eat  of  the  king's 
meat;  and  as  thou  seest,  deal  with  thy  servants.     So  he  14 
hearkened  unto  them  in  this  matter,  and  proved  them 
ten  days.    And  at  the  end  of  ten  days  their  countenances  15 
appeared  fairer,  and  they  were  fatter  in  fiesh,  than  all  the 
youths  which  did  eat  of  the  king's  meat.   So  "  the  steward  16 
took  away  their  meat,   and  the  wine  that  they  should 
drink,  and  gave  them  pulse.     Now  as   for  these  four  17 

*  Heb.  Hammelzar.  ^  Or,  herbs 

endangfer  my  head.  The  word  hiyycb  is  late  Hebrew  or 
Aramaic,  and  occurs  only  here,  since  Ezek.  xviii.  7  is  regarded  as 
a  corruption. 

11.  Then  said  Daniel  to  the  steward,  &c.  The  word  '  melsar' 
rendered  '  steward  '  occurs  only  in  this  chapter.  No  satisfactory 
explanation  of  the  word  has  yet  been  given.  If  the  text  is  ori- 
ginal the  steward  is  a  subordinate  official  set  over  Daniel  and  his 
companions.  Rut  the  LXX  reads  here  Abiesdri.  and  thus  identi- 
fies the  person  here  mentioned  with  the  chief  of  the  eunuchs  in 
verses  3,  11,  18.  It  presupposes  also  a  different  vocalization  of 
the  verb,  and  reads  as  follows  :  'Then  said  D.  to  Abiesdri,  the 
chief  of  the  eunuchs,  wlio  was  set  over,  &c.' 

12.  ten  :  a  round  number  :  cf.  ver.  20,  Zech.  viii.  23. 
pulse,  i.e.  vegetable  food, 

13.  meat,  rather  '  dainties.'     See  ver.  5. 

15.  fatter  in  fiesh.  This  expression  is  used  in  Gen.  xli.  2  of 
the  fat  kine  in  Pharaoh's  dream. 

16.  the  steward.     See  ver.  11. 

took  away  .  .  .  and  gave,  rather  '  continued  taking  away  .  . . 
and  giving.'     See  Driver,  Hebrew  Tenses,  §  135.  5. 

17-19.  At  the  end  of  the  three  years  Daniel  and  his  three 
companions,  who  are  found  to  be  superior  in  knowledge  and 
wisdom  to  the  other  youths  that  were  educated  with  them,  are 
appointed  to  serve  upon  the  king. 

E 


12  DANIEL  1.  18-20 

youths,  God  gave  them  knowledge  and  skill  in  all  learn- 
ing and  wisdom :  and  Daniel  had  understanding  in  all 

18  visions  and  dreams.  And  at  the  end  of  the  days  which 
the  king  had  *  appointed  for  bringing  them  in,  the  prince 
of  the  eunuchs  brought  them  in  before  Nebuchadnezzar. 

19  And  the  king  communed  with  them;  and  among  them 
all  was  found  none  like  Daniel,  Hananiah,  Mishael,  and 

30  Azariah  :  therefore  stood  they  before  the  king.     And  in 

*  Heb.  said. 


V?.  knowledge.  The  same  word  is  rendered  *  science '  in 
ver.  4, 

in  all  learning.  Better  *  in  all  literature  '  (cf.  ver.  4)  or  in 
all  kinds  of  books. 

wisdom.  As  Driver  observes,  'wisdom  is  used  here,  in  a 
concrete  sense,  of  an  intelligently  arranged  body  of  principles,  or, 
as  we  should  now  say,  science.  The  term  must  be  understood  as 
representing  the  popular  estimate  of  the  subjects  referred  to  ;  for 
the  ''  wisdom  "  of  the  Chaldean  priests,  except  in  so  far  as  it  took 
cognizance  of  the  actual  factsof  astronomy,  was  in  reality  nothing 
but  "  a  systematized  superstition."  ' 

in  all  visions,  rather  '  in  all  kinds  of  visions.'  These  words 
serve  to  introduce  the  narrative  that  follows. 

18.  Not  only  the  four  Jewish  youths  but  all  the  young  men 
that  had  been  trained  for  the  king's  service  were  brought  before 
the  king. 

19.  communed,  literally  'talked'  or  'spake.' 

stood  they  before  the  king,  i.  e.  became  his  personal  ser- 
vants :  cf.  ver.  5. 

20-21.  These  verses  come  in  haltingly  after  the  last  words  of 
ver.  19,  which  forms  the  natural  close  of  the  introduction  of  the 
book,  '  therefore  stood  they  before  the  king.'  Marti  rejects  them 
as  a  later  addition  on  the  ground  that  ver.  20,  ignoring  v.  19**, 
resumes  the  subject  of  v.  19*,  and  introduces  to  the  detriment  of 
the  context  an  explanation  of  v,  19^  which  is  really  an  anticipation 
of  that  which  first  comes  to  light  in  chap.  ii.  It  is  a  disturbing 
addition ;  for  if  the  king  had  found  the  Jewish  youths  ten  times 
wiser  than  all  the  sages  of  Babylon  he  would  naturally  have  con- 
sulted them  before  the  wise  men  of  Bab^'lon.  and  not  have  waited 
till,  in  ii.  16,  they  volunteered  their  help.  Even  if  he  had  con- 
sulted the  Babylonian  sages  first  as  a  matter  of  policy,  he  would 
not,  when  they  proved  helpless,  have  failed  to  consult  the  Jewish 


DANIEL  1.  21—2.  I  13 

every  matter  of  wisdom  and  understanding,  concerning 
which  the  king  inquired  of  them,  he  found  them  ten 
times  better  than  all  the  magicians  and  enchanters  that 
were  in  all  his  realm.     And  Daniel  continued  even  unto  21 
the  first  year  of  king  Cyrus. 

And  in  the  second  year  of  the  reign  of  Nebuchad-  2 

youths  who  were  ten  times  wiser  than  they.  Hence  our  author, 
who  represents  the  king  as  giving  orders  for  the  destruction  of  all 
the  wise  men,  Daniel  and  his  companions  being  amongst  the 
number  in  ii.  12-13,  could  not  have  written  i.  20-ai.  Such  an 
order  could  onl^'  have  been  issued  when  the  chiefest  of  the  wise 
men  of  Babylon  had  failed. 

20.  of  wisdom  and  understanding*.  So  LXX,  Theod.,  and 
Vulg.    The  Hebrew  reads  *  of  the  wisdom  of  understanding.' 

ten  times.     Cf.  Gen.  xliii.  34. 

magicians  and  enchanters.  See  note  on  ii.  2.  Nearly  all 
the  Hebrew  MSS.  omit  the  'and,'  but  it  is  found  in  the  LXX, 
Theod.,  and  Vulg. 

21.  continued  even  unto.  The  Hebrew  =  *  was  unto  '  is  very 
unusual.  Since  Daniel  was  living  in  the  third  year  of  Cyrus, 
according  to  x.  i,  it  is  clear  that  the  words  here  must  be  inter- 
preted in  the  sense  that  Daniel  lived  at  the  court  until  (Heb.  'ad) 
the  first  year  of  Cyrus,  and  that  no  notice  is  taken  of  his  time 
beyond  that  date;  cf.  Win  Ps. ex.  i,  cxii.  8,  &c.  Ewald  suggests 
that  the  words  '  at  the  king's  court '  have  been  lost.  The  words 
seem  to  imply  that  Daniel  lived  to  the  beginning  of  the  new  era 
initiated  by  Cyrus,  who  permitted  the  Jews  to  return  to  Palestine 
(Ezra  i.  i,  v.  13,  vi.  3).  If,  as  it  appears,  i.  20-21  are  a  later 
addition,  the  glosser  may  have  already  found  in  xi.  i  the  words 
'in  the  first  year  of  Cyrus  '  (so  LXX  and  Theod.),  and  from  thence 
drawn  his  data  (Barton). 

the  first  year  of  king"  Cyrus.  The  year  designed  here  is 
the  first  year  of  Cyrus'  reign  as  king  of  Babylon  in  538  B.C.,  the 
seventieth  year  after  the  date  of  Daniel's  captivity. 

Cyrus.  In  Hebrew  the  word  is  Koresh,  in  Persian  Kiirn-s/i, 
in  Babylonian  Kufdsh. 

ii.  This  chapter  has  a  didactic  purpose.  As  in  chapter  i  the 
Jews  are  exhorted  to  be  true  to  the  Law,  even  to  its  ceremonial 
requirements,  so  in  this  chapter  they  are  encouraged  to  hold  fast 
to  the  national  hope  of  the  Messianic  kingdom.  To  justify  their 
belief  in  this  expectation  the  superiority  of  the  wisdom  of  the  Jews 
above  that  of  the  heathen  is  shown  in  the  incidents  connected 

E  2 


14  DANIEL  2.  i 

nezzar  Nebuchadnezzar  dreamed  dreams ;  and  his  spirit 

with  the  king's  dream  and  its  interpretation.  The  wisdom  thus 
triumphant  is  shown  to  spring  from  the  direct  revelation  of  the 
God  of  the  Jews,  and  His  supremacy  above  all  gods  is  accordingly 
acknowledged  by  the  king.  In  the  dream  the  succession  of  the 
world  empires  is  foreshadowed,  and,  as  these  had  risen  in  the 
order  foreshadowed  in  his  dream  and  its  interpretation,  the  Jews 
were  assured  of  the  certainty  of  the  coming  kingdom. 

The  narrative  in  many  respects  recalls  Gen.  xli.  In  both 
accounts  a  heathen  king  is  visited  by  a  dream  which  alarms  him  : 
in  both  he  sends  for  his  magicians,  but  they  prove  helpless  :  in 
both  a  youthful  Jew,  who  ascribed  his  wisdom  wholly  to  the  help 
of  this  God,  gives  the  true  interpretation,  and  is  raised  to  the  highest 
honours.     For  similarities  in  point  of  diction,  cf.  verses  i,  2,  30. 

1-2.  Troubled  by  a  dream  Nebuchadnezzar  summoned  his  wise 
men  to  make  known  to  him  the  dream  he  had  dreamed,  and  also 
its  interpretation. 

1.  in  the  second  year.  The  events  that  follow  are  said  to 
have  occurred  in  the  second  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  In  order 
to  bring  this  statement  into  harmony  with  that  of  the  '  three 
years  *  in  i.  5,  18  various  hypotheses  have  been  advanced.  1°.  Jose- 
phus  (Ant.  X.  10.  3'  explains  the  two  years  as  Uwo  years  after 
the  sack  of  Egypt.'  2°.  Hengstenberg  and  others  assume  that  in 
i.  I  and  Jer.  xxv.  i  Nebuchadnezzar  was  reigning  conjointly  with 
his  father  Nabopolassar,  and  that  the  second  year  in  the  text  is 
the  second  year  after  Nabopolassar's  death.  3°.  Ewald,  Marti, 
and  others  suppose  that  '  ten  *  dropped  out  after  *  two,'  as  in 
Joshua  xxiv.  12,  and  that  thus  the  original  text  was  '  in  the  twelfth 
year.'  4**.  Driver  ingeniously  defends  the  text.  *  There  is  not, 
perhaps,  necessarily  a  contradiction  here  with  the  *'  three  years  " 
of  i.  5,  18.  By  Hebrew  usage  fragments  of  time  were  reckoned 
as  full  units :  thus  Samaria,  which  was  besieged  from  the  fourth 
to  the  sixth  year  of  Hezekiah,  is  said  to  have  been  taken  "  at  the 
end  "  of  three  years  (2  Kings  xviii.  9,  10) ;  and  in  Jer.  xxxiv.  14 
"at  the  end  of  seven  years"  means  evidently  when  the  seventh 
year  has  arrived  (see  also  Mark  viii.  31,  &c.).  If,  now,  the  author, 
following  a  custom  which  was  certainly  sometimes  adopted  by 
Jewish  writers,  and  which  was  general  in  Assyria  and  Babylonia, 
"  postdated  ''  the  regnal  years  of  a  king,  i.e.  counted  as  his  first 
year  not  the  year  of  his  accession  but  the  first  full  j'ear  afterwards 
(see  Art.  Chronology  in  Hastings'  BD.,  i.  400),  and  if  further  Nebu- 
chadnezzar gave  orders  for  tbe  education  of  the  Jewish  youths  in 
his  accession  year,  the  end  of  his  "three  years"  of  i.  5,  18  might 
be  reckoned  as  falling  within  the  king's  second  year.' 

dreamed  dreams.     For  the  use  of  the  plural  where  a  sin- 


DANIEL  2.  2  15 

was  troubled,  and  his  sleep  brake  from  him.     Then  the  a 
king   commanded   to   call   the   magicians,  and  the  en- 
chanters, and  the  sorcerers,  and  the  Chaldeans,  for  to 


gular  is  meant  we  may  compare  iv.  5,  vii.  i,  &c.,  'visions  of  my 
(his)  head.'  Theod.  and  the  Vulg.  render  it  by  the  singular,  but 
the  LXX  has  the  plural.  On  oneiromancy  or  divination  by  dreams, 
see  Eticyc.  Bib.,  i.  11 18;  Hastings'  DRE.,  iv.  776. 

Ms  spirit  was  troubled.  This  expression,  v^hich  recurs  in 
ver.  3,  is  suggested  by  Gen.  xH.  8. 

his  sleep  f  brake  f  from  him.  The  Hebrew  here  literally 
means  '  his  sleep  was  done  for  him.'  Twice  the  niphal  of  the 
verb  'to  be  '  is  found  elsewhere  as  here,  i.  e.  in  viii,  27,  Mic.  ii.  4, 
but  in  both  cases  the  text  is  doubtful.  Both  the  LXX  and  Theod. 
support  the  Massoretic  here  :  6  {/nros  avrov  kyevero  air'  avrov. 
But  it  is  open  to  question  whether  this  was  the  original  reading 
of  the  LXX,  since  Syr.\  which  is  a  rendering  of  it,  and  Sym- 
machus  read  aniarri  air'  avrov — the  actual  words  found  in  vi.  18 
in  Theod.,  where  we  have  the  Aramaic  equivalent  of  what  evi- 
dently stood  originally  in  the  Hebrew  here,  even  to  the  idiomatic 
use  of  the  preposition  '  for  him.'  Hence  we  should,  with  Behr- 
mann  and  others,  read  nad'^da  =  dneaTT],  '  departed,'  as  in  vi.  18, 
Gen.  xxxi.  40,  Esther  vi.  i.  'For  him,'  literally,  'in  regard 
to  him.' 

2.  to  call  the  magicians.  Here,  as  in  the  preceding  sentence, 
the  diction  of  Gen.  xli.  8  is  used. 

the  magficians,  &c.  There  are  six  words  used  in  our  text 
as  designations  of  magicians  or  diviners. 

i".  Chaldeans S  five  times  alone,  i.  4  (probably  in  a  general 
sense\  ii.  4,  5,  10a,  iii.  8,  and  five  times  in  conjunction  with  other 
terms,  ii.  2,  106,  iv.  7,  v.  7,  11.     See  note  on  i.  4. 

2°.  wise  men  2,  eleven  times  alone,  ii.  12,  13,  14,  18,  24  (twice), 
48,  iv.  6,  18,  V.  7,  8,  and  twice  in  conjunction  with  other  terms,  ii. 

27,  V.  15.  .        .  .  , 

3^  enchanters  5,  eight  times,  and  always  in  conjunction  with 
other  terms  i.  20,  ii.  2,  10,  27,  iv.  7,  v.  7,  11,  15.  This  is  probably 
a  Babylonian  loan-word  :  in  Ass3'rian  dWpu,  which  according  to 
Zimmern  {KAT.^  590,  note  i)  means  '  the  purifier.'  This  word  is 
not  found  elsewhere  in  the  O.T. 

4°.  magicians^,  once  alone,  iv,  9;  and  six  times  in  conjunction 
with  other  terms,  i.  20,  ii.  2,  106,  27,  iv.  7,  v.  11.  This  word, 
which  is  of  doubtful  etymology,  is  used  in  Genesis  and  Exodus  of 
Egyptian  magicians. 


i6  DANIEL  2.  3,  4 

tell  the  king  his  dreams.     So  they  came  in  and  stood 

3  before  the  king.     And  the  king  said  unto  them,  I  have 
dreamed  a  dream,  and  my  spirit  is  troubled  to  know  the 

4  dream.     Then  spake  the  Chaldeans  to  the  king  ^  in  the 

*  Or,  in  Aramaic 

5**.  determiners  \  four  times,  ii.  27,  iv.  7,  v.  7,  11.  The  meaning 
of  this  term  is  quite  uncertain  other  than  that  it  denotes  a  class 
which  predicted  the  future.     The  R.V.  renders  it  'soothsayers.' 

6*'.  sorcerers^,  only  once  in  ii.  2  :  elsewhere  in  the  O.T.  five 
times  as  verb  or  noun. 

Of  the  above  terms  the  magicians,  enchanters,  and  Chaldeans 
occur  most  frequently  together,  ii.  2,  10,  iv.  7,  v.  11.  A  comparison 
of  all  the  passages  in  which  the  above  six  terms  are  found  shows 
that  they  are  used  rather  vaguely,  and  Lenormant's  attempt  to 
identify  some  of  them  with  certain  classes  of  diviners  in  Babylon 
is  regarded  as  a  complete  failure. 

3-11.  The  wise  men  required  to  tell  the  dream  and  its  inter- 
pretation. They  replied  that  they  were  ready  to  interpret  the 
dream  if  the  king  recounted  it  to  them,  but  that  they  could  not 
do  both. 

3.  The  king  had  not  forgotten  his  dream,  but  had  determined 
to  test  his  wise  men  by  requiring  them  to  tell  both  the  dream  and 
its  interpretation.  Behrmann  mentions  an  exact  parallel  to  our 
account  in  Ibn  Hisham's  Leben  Mohanimeds  (ed.  Wustenfeld, 
p.  9sq.),  where  a  certain  king  of  Yemen  made  this  twofold 
demand  on  his  wise  men.  They  replied  :  '  Tell  us  the  dream 
and  we  will  declare  unto  you  its  interpretation.'  Then  said  he  : 
*If  I  tell  you  the  dream  I  cannot  rely  on  your  interpretation  ;  for 
he,  who  knows  not  the  dream  before  I  communicate  it  to  him, 
does  not  know  its  interpretation. 

4.  Then  spake  ...  in  the  Syrian  lanefuage.  For  *  in  the 
Syrian  language'  it  is  better  to  read  'in  Aramaic'  The  use  of 
the  word  *  spake  ^ '  here  is  very  unusual.  If  that  which  is  said 
is  given,  'amar  =  '  said  '  is  regularly  used.  Hence  Marti,  following 
Haupt,  suggests  that  *  and  said  * '  should  be  restored  after  the 
words  *  to  the  king,'  and  that  this  phrase  was  displaced  b}'  *  in 
Aramaic  •\'  But  it  is  possible  that  in  the  latter  word  we  have 
simply  a  misreading  by  some  scribe  of  the  former,  the  misreading 
being  suggested  by  the  fact  that  Aramaic  did  follow.  In  any  case 
the  words  '  in  Aramaic '  should  be  bracketed  as  an  intrusion.  If 
they  did  not  originate  as  I  have  suggested,  then  the  explanation 

*  jnw.  "  D'::\rDO,  Assyr.  kaMpu.  ^  nnT. 


DANIEL  2.  5  17 

Syrian  language,  *  O  king,  live  for  ever  :  tell  thy  servants 
the  dream,  and  we  will  shew  the  interpretation.     The  5 
king  answered  and  said  to  the  Chaldeans,  ^  The  thing  is 
gone   from  me :   if  ye  make  not  known  unto  me  the 

*  Ch.  ii.  4-vii.  28  is  in  Aramaic. 

**  Or,  The  ivord  is  gone  forth  from  mc 

of  Oppert,  Lenormant,  and  others  should  be  accepted  that  'in 
Aramaic  '  is  a  gloss,  added  as  in  Ezra  iv.  7  to  designate  the  idi<;m 
of  the  chapters  that  follow.  This  was  the  language  in  which 
ii.  4-vii.  28  were  originally  composed  and  this  language  was  re- 
tained. 

If  the  text  meant  to  affirm  (as  it  does  in  its  present  corrupt 
form)  that  Aramaic  was  used  at  court  in  official  communications, 
the  narrative  in  ch.  vii  would  have  been  resumed  in  Hebrew, 
whereas  it  is  continued  in  Aramaic.  Jerome  popularized  in  his 
Contntentaty  this  erroneous  view  that  the  wise  men  spake  in 
Aramaic.  Thence  arose  the  false  designation  of  Biblical  Aramaic 
as  '  Chaldee.'  Biblical  Aramaic  belongs  to  the  North  Semitic 
branch,  which  was  subdivided  into  (i)  Eastern  Aramaic  or  Syriac, 
which  was  used  by  the  Christian  Syrians,  and  is  found  in  modified 
forms  in  the  Babylonian  Talmud  and  the  sacred  books  of  the 
Mandaeans.  (2)  Western  or  Palestinian  Aramaic,  which  is  found 
in  Daniel  ii,  4-vii,  Ezra  iv.  8-vi.  18,  vii.  12-26,  the  Assuan  Papyri, 
the  Jewish  Targums,  and  Palestinian  Gemara. 

The  wise  men  of  Babylon  would  have  addressed  the  king  in 
Babylonian  or  Assyrian,  which  is  declared  in  Jer.  v.  15.  Isa. 
xxviii.  II,  xxxiii.  19  to  be  unintelligible  to  a  Jew.  Western 
Aramaic  hid  displaced  Hebrew  wholly  as  the  popular  language 
in  the  second  century  b.  c. 

O  king-,  live  for  ever.  The  usual  mode  of  saluting  Oriental 
kings.  Cf.  I  Kings  i.  31,  Neh.  ii.  3,  Dan.  iii.  9,  v.  10,  vi.  6.  It 
had  already  been  used  at  the  Assyrian  Court  and  subsequently 
prevailed  amongst  the  Sassanidae. 

6.  Tho  thingf  is  jfone  from  me,  i.  e.  the  matter  has  left  my 
memory.  This  misrenderlng,  found  already  in  Theod.  (o  A070? 
dTT*  Ijjiov  &iT(fTTrj  and  the  Vulgate),  is  now  generally  regarded  as 
wrong.  The  clause  was  omitted  in  the  original  LXX,  but  in 
Origen's  text  is  supplied  from  Theod.  between  an  asterisk  and 
a  metobelus.  This  rendering  proceeded  in  the  view  that  ^acaci 
was  a  dialectical  variety  oVazal.  Two  explanations  are  offered  : 
I®.  According  to  Noldeke  {KATr  617)  azda  is  a  Persian  word 
meaning  'sure,'  'certain.'  In  this  case  we  should  render  :  'The 
word  from  me  is  sure,'  i.  e.  'what  I  say  will  certainly  be  carried 
out.'     Cf.  iii.  14.     2°.  According  to  Andreas  (^Martl's  Grammar, 


1 8  DANIEL  2.  6-9 

dream  and  the  interpretation  thereof,  ye  shall  be  cut  in 
6  pieces,  and  your  houses  shall  be  made  a  dunghill.  But 
if  ye  shew  the  dream  and  the  interpretation  thereof,  ye 
shall  receive  of  me  gifts  and  rewards  and  great  honour : 
therefore  shew  me  the  dream  and  the  interpretation 
1  thereof.  They  answered  the  second  time  and  said.  Let 
the  king  tell  his  servants  the  dream,  and  we  will  shew  the 

8  interpretation.     The  king  answered  and  said,  I  know  of 
a  certainty  that  ye  would  *gain  time,  because  ye  see 

9  ^Uhe  thing  is  gone  from  me.     But  if  ye  make  not  known 

*  Aram,  buy  the  time. 

^  Or,  the  word  is  gone  forth  from  me:  that  if  ^c. 

p.  51)  azda  is  a  Middle-Persian  word  meaning  'news,'  'intelli- 
gence.' In  this  case  the  rendering  would  be  :  '  the  word  from  me 
is  news,'  i.  e.  proclaimed.  The  former  appears  to  be  more 
satisfactory. 

ye  shall  "be  cut  in  pieces,  i.  e.  dismembered  limb  from  limb. 
Cf.  iii.  29  where  the  same  phrase  recurs  and  the  LXX  has  ha- 
fi.(Xt(r$TjaeTai,  2  Mace.  i.  i6  /^ff^t]  ttoirjaavTis,  Jos.  Ant.  xv.  8.  4 
fifXiarl  di€\6vT(s  -npovOiaav  Kvaiv.  The  word  for  '  limb  '  Jiaddani) 
is  Persian,  i.  e.  andam,  in  Zend  haiiddnta.  By  means  of  this 
punishment  the  condemned  was  deprived  of  the  rights  of  burial. 
See  passage  just  quoted  from  Josephus. 

be  made  a  dungfhill.  Cf.  iii.  29,  Ezra  vi.  11.  By  this  punish- 
ment the  greatest  disgrace  was  inflicted  on  the  memory  of  the 
persons  executed.     Cf.  2  Kings  x.  27,  Ezra  vi.  ir. 

6.  rewards.  This  is  a  rare  word — found  only  elsewhere  in 
V.  17.  It  is  derived  from  the  Persian  according  to  Andreas  in  the 
Glossary  in  Marti's  Grammar. 

7.  the  interpretation.  Better  with  Theod.,  Pesh.,  and  Vulg. 
read  'its  interpretation.' 

8.  would  g-aiu  time:  lit.  'would  buy  time.'  The  LXX  and 
Theod.  render  Kaipbv  vfj-eh  e^ayopd^erf,  and  the  same  phrase  is 
found  in  Eph.  v.  i6,  Col.  iv.  5.  But  the  sense  is  different.  In  our 
text  the  object  is  to  temporize  and  defer  the  fatal  moment :  in 
St.  Paul  to  utilize  the  present  to  the  full. 

the  thing-  is  gone  from  me.  Rather  '  the  word  from  me  is 
sure.'     See  note  on  ver.  5. 

9.  But  if.  These  words  (di  hen)  introduce  the  explanation  of 
the  last  clause  in  ver.  8,  and  should  be  rendered  '  that  if  :  i.e. 
'  the  word  from  me  is  sure  that,  if  &c.' 


DANIEL  2.  10-14.  19 

unto  me  the  dream,  there  is  but  one  law  for  you :  for  ye 
have  prepared  lying  and  corrupt  words  to  speak  before 
me,  till  the   time  be  changed :    therefore  tell   me   the 
dream,  and  I  shall  know  that  ye  can  shew  me  the  inter- 
pretation thereof.     The  Chaldeans  answered  before  the  10 
king,  and  said.  There  is  not  a  man  upon  the  earth  that 
can  shew  the  king's  matter  :  forasmuch  as  no  king,  ^  lord, 
nor  ruler,  hath  asked  such  a  thing  of  any  magician,  or 
enchanter,  or  Chaldean.     And  it  is  a  rare  thing  that  the  n 
king  requireth,  and  there  is  none  other  that  can  shew  it 
before  the  king,  except  the  gods,  whose  dwelling  is  not 
with  flesh.     For  this  cause  the  king  was  angry  and  very  1 3 
furious,  and  commanded  to  destroy  all  the  wise  men 
of  Babylon.    So  the  decree  went  forth,  and  the  wise  men  13 
were  to  be  slain  ;  and  they  sought  Daniel  and  his  com- 
panions to  be  slain.     Then  Daniel  returned  answer  with  14 
counsel  and  prudence  to  Arioch  the  captain  of  the  king's 

*  Or.  be  he  never  so  great  and  powerful,  hath  &c. 

there  is  but  one  law  for  you,  i.e.  your  punishment  is 
inevitable.  Omitted  by  the  LXX  and  Theod.  The  word  for  law 
[dath)  is  Persian. 

prepared,  or  'agreed  together.' 

10.  no  king,  lord,  nor  ruler.  The  Massoretic  can  also  be 
rendered  as  in  the  margin.  The  LXX  presupposes  a  different 
text :  *  no  king  nor  prince.' 

11.  rare,  or  'difficult.'  The  LXX  here  gives  a  duplicate 
rendering  of  the  Aramaic  word,  l^apvs  Hal  enido^os. 

requireth.  Should  be  *  asketh,'  as  in  ver.  10. 
12-16.  The  king  gives  orders  that  all  the  wise  men  should  be 
slain.  The  execution  of  this  command  is  adjourned  on  the  request 
of  Daniel,  who  with  his  companions  was  regarded  as  belonging 
to  the  guild  of  wise  men,  and  who  promises  to  meet  the  king's 
demands  if  he  is  granted  time. 

13.  the  decree  went  forth.  Theodotion's  rendering  is  to 
hoyfxa  t^fjXOe,  which  is  almost  identical  with  St.  Luke's  diction  in 
Luke  ii.  i. 

14.  returned  answer  with  .  .  .  priidence.  Cf.  Prov.  xxvi.  16 
for  the  same  phrase  in  Hebrew. 

Arioch.    An  ancient  Babylonian  name  of  the  Sumerian  period, 


20  DANIEL  2.  15-19 

guard,  which  was  gone  forth  to  slay  the  wise  men  of 

'5  Babylon;  he  answered  and  said  to  Arioch  the  king's 

captain,  Wherefore   is   the  decree  so   urgent   from  the 

king?     Then  Arioch  made  the  thing  known  to  Daniel. 

16  And  Daniel  went  in,  and  desired  of  the  king  that  he 
would  "-appoint  him  a  time,  ^and  he  would  shew  the  king 
the  interpretation. 

17  Then  Daniel  went  to  his  house,  and  made  the  thing 
known   to   Hananiah,  Mishael,  and  Azariah,   his  com- 

18  panions :  that  they  would  desire  mercies  of  the  God  of 
heaven  concerning  this  secret;  that  Daniel  and  his 
companions  should  not  perish  with  the  rest  of  the  wise  men 

19  of  Babylon.  Then  was  the  secret  revealed  unto  Daniel  in 

*  Or,  give  htm  time  ^  Or,  that  he  might 

but  not  of  the  later  (i.  e.  Nebuchadnezzar's)  period,  according  to 
Sayce.  It  is  found  in  Gen.  xiv.  i,  whence  probably  it  has  been 
borrowed  both  here  and  in  Judith  i.  6.  It  is  said  to  be  derived 
from  Eri-Aku,  'servant  of  the  Moon-god.' 

captain  of  the  king's  gfaard.  This  expression  is  found  in 
Gen.  xxxvii.  36,  xxxix.  i,  2  Kings  xxv.  8  sqq.,  Jer.  xxxix.  9  sqq. 
The  word  here  rendered  'guard'  or  'guardsmen'  originally 
meant  'slaughterers'  or  'butchers'  (i.e.  of  animals).  Some 
trace  of  this  may  remain  in  i  Sam.  ix.  23,  24,  where,  as  in  Arabic, 
it  has  the  signification  of  '  cook.'  In  the  present  passage  the  LXX 
and  Theod.  follow  this  meaning,  and  render  apxif^ayfipos — a  ren- 
dering found  also  in  Jubilees  xxxiv.  11,  xxxix,  2. 

15.  urgent.  Rather  'harsh.'  The  LXX  renders  mKpuis, 
Theod.  dvaibrjs. 

16.  and  he  would  shew.  Better  render  as  in  margin,  and 
compare  ii.  18  for  the  same  idiom. 

17-23.  In  answer  to  the  prayers  of  Daniel  and  his  companions 
the  secret  is  revealed  to  him  in  a  vision  of  the  night,  and  thanks- 
giving is  offered  by  him  in  a  hymn  for  the  mercy  vouchsafed. 

18.  the  God  of  heaven.  Cf.  vv.  19,  37,  44;  Ezra  i.  a,  v.  11, 
la,  VI.  9,  Neh.  i.  4,  5,  ii.  4,  20,  1  Enoch  cvi.  5  (cf.  xiii.  4),  xiii.  4, 
Tob.  x.  II,  Judith  v.  8,  vi.  19,  Rev.  xi.  13,  xvi.  11.  This  phrase 
is  found  in  Gen.  xxiv.  7,  but  after  the  Exile  it  became  a  favourite 
designation  of  God  owing  to  the  growing  transcendence  of  Jewish 
thought  regarding  God.  See  note  on  iv.  26. 
secret.     Raz  is  a  Persian  loan-word. 


DANIEL  2.  ao-ai  21 

a  vision  of  the  night.     Then  Daniel  blessed  the  God  of 
heaven.    Daniel  answered  and  said,  Blessed  be  the  name  20 
of  God  for  ever  and  ever :   for  wisdom  and  might  are 
his:  and  he  changeth  the  times  and  the  seasons:   he  21 

19.  vision  of  the  ni^ht.     Cf.  Isa.  xxix.  7. 

20-23.  We  liave  here  Daniel's  hymn,  consisting  of  a  tristich 
(ver.  20),  a  tetrastich  (ver.  21),  a  tristich  (ver.  22),  and  a  tetras- 
tich (ver.  23).     I  have  arranged  the  R.V.  accordingly : 

20.  Blessed  be  the  name  of  God 
For  ever  and  ever  : 

For  wisdom  and  might  are  his  : 

21.  And  he  changeth  the  times  and  the  seasons  : 
He  removeth  kings,  and  setteth  up  kings  : 
He  giveth  v^isdom  unto  the  wise, 

And  knowledge  to  them  that  know  understanding. 

22.  He  revealeth  the  deep  and  secret  things  : 
He  knoweth  what  is  in  the  darkness, 
And  the  light  dwelleth  with  him. 

23.  I  thank  and  praise  thee,  O  thou  God  of  my  fathers, 
Who  hast  given  me  wisdom  and  might, 

And  hast  now  made  known  to  me  what  we  desired  of  thee  ; 
For  thou  hast  made  known  unto  us  the  king's  matter. 

20.  The  first  two  lines  of  this  stanza  agree  almost  verbally  with 
Pss.  xli.  13,  cvi.  48,  and  the  third  with  Job  xii.  13.  These  lines 
constitute  most  probably  a  familiar  liturgical  formulae. 

answered  and  said.  These  words  are  used  of  the  beginning 
of  an  address  or  hymn,  as  in  iii.  9,  14,  16,  &c. 

the  name,  i.e.  the  revelation  or  manifestation  of  God. 

for  ever  and  ever.  Better  as  in  Ps.  xli.  13  (R.V.),  'from 
everlasting  to  everlasting.' 

wisdom  and  might  are  his.  The  wisdom  and  the  might  of 
God  arc  the  theme  of  the  lines  that  follow.  In  ver.  ai*  ^  the 
exhibition  of  God's  might  is  represented,  and  in  ai*"*,  aa  the  in« 
stances  of  His  wisdom.  These  divine  attributes  are  in  ver.  23 
delegated  to  Daniel  to  meet  the  present  difficulty,  though  it  is 
difficult  to  see  how  the  divine  might  is  exercised  by  Daniel  here. 
Apparently  the  MSS.  varied  here.     See  note  on  ver.  23. 

21.  The  times  of  the  world  are  in  the  hands  of  God,  and  all 
power  and  all  wisdom  come  from  Him. 

the  times  and  the  seasons.  Better  render  with  LXX  and 
Theod.  {naipovs  ical  xpwi/ous)  *  the  seasons  and  the  times.'  Cf.  vii. 
12  ;  also  Acts  i.  7  xp^^^''^  V  Kaipoi,  i  Thess.  v.  i. 


2a  DANIEL  2.  23-25 

removeth  kings,  and  setteth  up  kings  :  he  giveth  wisdom 
unto  the  wise,  and  knowledge  to  them  that  know  under- 

22  standing:  he  revealeth  the  deep  and  secret  things:  he 
knoweth  what  is  in  the  darkness,  and  the  light  dwelleth 

23  with  him.  I  thank  thee,  and  praise  thee,  O  thou  God 
of  my  fathers,  who  hast  given  me  wisdom  and  might, 
and  hast  now  made  known  unto  me  what  we  desired  of 
thee :    for  thou  hast  made  known  unto  us  the  king's 

34  matter.  Therefore  Daniel  went  in  unto  Arioch,  whom 
the  king  had  appointed  to  destroy  the  wise  men  of 
Babylon  :  he  went  and  said  thus  unto  him ;  Destroy  not 
the  wise  men  of  Babylon :  bring  me  in  before  the  king, 
and  I  will  shew  unto  the  king  the  interpretation. 

25  Then  Arioch  brought  in  Daniel  before  the  king  in 
haste,  and  said  thus  unto  him,  I  have  found  a  man  of  the 
children  of  the  captivity  of  Judah,  that  will  make  known 

removeth  king's,  and  setteth  up  kings.  Possibly  the  two 
Greek  versions  are  right  in  omitting  the  second  '  kings.'  Hence 
'removeth  and  setteth  up  kings.' 

gfiveth  wisdom.     Cf.  Sir.  i.  i. 

know  understanding.     Cf.  Pro  v.  iv.  i. 

22.  revealeth  the  deep  .  .  .  things.     Cf.  Job  xii.  22, 

the  light  dwelleth  with  him.    Cf.  i  John  1. 7,  iTim.  vi.  16. 

23.  God  of  my  fathers.  Cf.  2  Chron.  xx.  6,  Deut.  i.  21,  &c. 
Daniel  closes  his  hymn  with  a  thanksgiving  to  the  God  who,  un- 
changed among  all  the  changes  and  chances  of  the  world's  history, 
had  always  been  the  Defender  and  Saviour  of  His  people. 
Cf.  2  Chron.  xx.  6-12. 

wisdom  and  might.  Here  the  LXX  reads  'wisdom  and 
understanding,'  which  certainly  suits  the  context  better.  If  the 
LXX  is  right  the  corruption  could  be  explained  as  due  to  ver.  20''. 
24-30.  Daniel  is  brought  at  his  own  request  by  Arioch  into 
the  king's  presence,  and  declares  his  readiness  to  make  known 
the  dream  and  its  interpretation. 

24.  went  in  ...  he  went  and  said.  We  should,  with  ten 
Hebrew  MSS.,  the  two  Greek  versions,  and  the  Vulgate,  omit 
either  the  first  or  the  second  'went,'  and  read  simpl}'  'Therefore 
Daniel  went  in  unto  Arioch  .  .  .  and  said.' 

25.'  captivity.     Better  'exile.'     Cf.  v.  13.  vi.  13 


DANIEL  2.  26-28  23 

unto  the  king  the  interpretation.     The  king  answered  26 
and  said  to  Daniel,  whose  name  was  Belteshazzar,  Art 
thou  able  to  make  known   unto  me  the  dream  which 
I   have   seen,   and   the  interpretation   thereof?     Daniel  27 
answered  before  the  king,  and  said,  The  secret  which  the 
king  hath  demanded  can  neither  wise  men,  enchanters, 
magicians,  nor   soothsayers,   shew  unto  the  king ;    but  28 
there  is  a  God  in  heaven  that  revealeth  secrets,  and  he 
hath   made   known  to  the  king  Nebuchadnezzar  what 
shall  be  in  the  latter  days.     Thy  dream,  and  the  visions 

27.  On  the  terms  'enchanters,  &c.,'  see  note  on  ver.  2. 
soothsayers.     Better  render  'determiners.'      See  note  just 

referred  to. 

28.  in  the  latter  days,  ht.  '  in  the  end  of  the  days.'  The 
meaning  of  this  phrase,  which  occurs  fourteen  times  in  the  O.T., 
varies  according  to  the  outlook  of  the  writer.  In  Gen.  xHx.  i, 
Num.  xxiv.  14,  Deut.  xxxi.  29  (iv.  30),  Dan.  x.  14  it  is  used  of 
various  crises  in  Israel's  history  from  the  settlement  in  Canaan 
onwards  down  to  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  In  other 
passages,  as  in  Ezek.  xxxviii.  16,  Hos.  iii.  5,  Isa.  ii.  2  ( =  Mic.  iv.  i), 
Jer.  xlviii.  47,  Dan.  ii.  28,  &c.,  it  refers  to  events  and  periods  still 
in  the  future  connected  with  the  Messianic  age.  This  biblical 
phrase  recurs  in  the  Zadokite  Fragments  vi.  2,  viii.  10,  2  Bar.  x.  3, 
XXV.  I.  Other  forms  of  this  phrase  are  'the  end  of  the  ages,' 
T.  Lev.  xiv.  i,  2  Bar.  lix.  8,  'the  last  days,'  4  Ezra  xiii.  18,  '  the 
consummation  of  the  time(s),'  2  Bar.  xiii.  3,  xix.  5,  xxi.  8,  xxvii.  15, 
xxix.  8,  XXX.  3,  lix.  4,  'the  time  of  the  end,'  Dan.  xii.  4,  'the 
end,'  Dan.  vii.  26,  'the  end  of  the  first  age.'  4  Ezra  vi.  7,  'the  end 
of  this  age,'  4  Ezra  vii.  113. 

The  above  phrases,  the  number  of  which  could  be  easily  in- 
creased, exhibit  different  nuances  according  to  the  context  in 
which  they  occur,  but  have  all  an  eschatological  meaning. 

28'*.  This  sentence  seem  to  be  in  the  wrong  place.  The  words 
'  Thy  dream,  and  the  visions  of  thy  head  upon  thy  bed,  are  these  ' 
form  an  immediate  introduction  to  ver.  31  sqq.,  and  should  be  read 
after  ver.  30,     They  are  omitted  b3'  the  LXX. 

visions  of  thy  head.  Cf.  iv.  5,  10,  13,  vii.  i,  15.  The  head 
is  the  scat  of  the  seer's  vision,  but  thoughts  spring  from  the  heart. 
Cf.  ver.  30. 

29.  Before  the  king  fell  asleep  his  thoughts  were  dwelling  on 
what  should  come  to  pass  after  him.  In  the  dream  that  followed 
the  future  was  revealed. 


24  DANIEL  2.  39-35 

29  of  thy  head  upon  thy  bed,  are  these  :  as  for  thee,  O  king, 
thy  thoughts  came  into  thy  mind  upon  thy  bed,  what 
should  come  to  pass  hereafter :  and  he  that  revealeth 
secrets  hath  made  known  to  thee  what  shall  come  to 

30  pass.  But  as  for  me,  this  secret  is  not  revealed  to  me 
for  any  wisdom  that  I  have  more  than  any  living,  but  to 
the  intent  that  the  interpretation  may  be  made  known 
to  the  king,  and  that  thou  mayest  know  the  thoughts  of 

31  thy  heart.  Thou,  O  king,  sawest,  and  behold  a  great 
image.  This  image,  which  was  mighty,  and  whose  bright- 
ness was  excellent,  stood  before  thee ;  and  the  aspect 

32  thereof  was  terrible.  As  for  this  image,  his  head  was 
of  fine  gold,  his  breast  and  his  arms  of  silver,  his  belly 

33  and  his  thighs  of  brass,  his  legs  of  iron,  his  feet  part  of  iron, 

34  and  part  of  clay.  Thou  sawest  till  that  a  stone  was  cut  out 
without  hands,  which  smote  the  image  upon  his  feet  that 

35  were  of  iron  and  clay,  and  brake  them  in  pieces.  Then  was 
the  iron,  the  clay,  the  brass,  the  silver,  and  the  gold,  broken 

thy  thongrhts  came  into  thy  mind.  Since  the  words  '  into 
thy  mind  '  have  to  be  supplied,  it  is  probable  that  the  text  is  here 
defective.  S/liqvt  ( =  *  came  up  ')  nowhere  else  stands  for  '  came 
up  into  the  mind.'  Hence,  as  in  the  Hebrew  phrase  in  Isa. 
Ixv.  17,  Jer.  iii.  16,  &c.,  the  Aramaic  phrase  should  be  restored. 
Cf.  4  Ezra  iii.  i  •'  cogitationes  meae  ascendebant  super  cor  meum  '  : 
Acts  vii.  23. 

30.  As  Joseph  in  Gen.  xli.  16,  so  Daniel  declares  that  the 
power  of  interpretation  comes  not  of  his  own  wisdom  but 
from  God. 

31-35.  The  king's  dream. 

31.  excellent.  This  word  has  here,  as  in  v.  12, 14,  the  meaning 
of  '  pre-eminent,'  *  surpassing.' 

34.  cut  out.  Restore  after  these  words  *  from  a  mountain,' 
with  LXX,  Theod.,  and  Jos,  A)it.  x.  10.  4.     Cf.  ver.  45. 

35.  The  great  image  collapses  into  dust,  which  was  carried 
away  like  the  chaff  of  the  summer  threshing-floors,  till  not  a  trace 
of  it  could  be  found. 

the  iron,  the  clay.  The  order  seems  wrong,  though  it  is 
supported  by  the  LXX  and  the  Vulg.     Better  read  with  Theod.  : 


DANIEL  2.  36-39  25 

in  pieces  together,   and  became  like  the  chaff  of  the 
summer  threshing-floors ;    and  the  wind  carried    them 
away,  that  no  place  was  found  for  them :  and  the  stone 
that  smote  the  image  became  a  great  *^  mountain,  and 
filled  the  whole  earth.     This  is  the  dream ;  and  we  will  36 
tell  the  interpretation  thereof  before  the  king.     Thou,  37 
O  king,  art  king  of  kings,  unto  whom  the  God  of  heaven 
hath  given  the  kingdom,  the  power,  and  the  strength, 
and  the  glory ;   and  wheresoever  the  children  of  men  38 
dwell,  the  beasts  of  the  field  and  the  fowls  of  the  heaven 
hath  he  given  into  thine  hand,  and  hath  made  thee  to 
rule  over  them  all :   thou  art  the  head  of  gold.     And  39 
after  thee  shall  arise  another  kingdom  inferior  to  thee; 
and  another  third  kingdom  of  brass,  which  shall  bear 

*  Or,  rock. 


'  the  clay,  the  iron.'  This  is  the  order  in  ver.  45  according  to  the 
LXX,  Theod.,  and  the  Vulg.  The  order  of  all  the  authorities  in 
ver.  3a  supports  this  restoration.  Hence  the  Massoretic  is  to  be 
corrected  accordingly  in  ver.  45. 

no  place  was  found.     Cf.  Rev.  xx.  11. 

36-45.  Interpretation  of  the  dream. 

3*7.  king"  of  kings.  This  was  the  usual  title  of  the  Persian 
kings;  cf.  Ezra  vii.  12.  It  is  applied  to  Nebuchadnezzar  in 
Ezek.  xxvi.  7,  though  according  to  Prince  it  was  not  the  customary 
Babylonian  form  of  address.  The  Assyrian  title  was  *  great  king ' ; 
cf.  Isa.  xxxvi.  4, 

unto  wliom  the  God  of  heaven  hath  given,  &c.  As  already 
in  ver.  21  our  author  declares  that  all  kings  owe  their  sovereignty 
to  God.     Cf.  Jer.  xxv.  9,  xxvii.  6,  xxviii.  14,  Isa.  xliv.  28,  xlv.  i. 

38.  the  beasts  of  the  field .  . .  hath  he  given.  Derived  from 
Jer.  xxvii.  6,  xxviii.  14. 

39.  The  second  and  third  kingdoms,  which  are  here  briefly 
referred  to,  are  the  Median  and  Persian.  According  to  the  view 
of  our  author  Darius  ^  the  Mode  '  (v.  31,  ix.  i,  xi.  r)  received  the 
kingdom  on  the  overthrow  of  Belshazzar.  How  long  he  reigned 
we  are  not  told,  but  on  his  death  he  was  succeeded  by  Cyrus 
'the  Persian  '  (vi.  28,  x.  i\  The  Median  kingdom  is  said  in  this 
verse  to  be  inferior  to  the  Assyrian  and  in  viii.  3  to  the  Persian. 


26  DANIEL  2.  40-44 

40  rule  over  all  the  earth.  And  the  fourth  kingdom  shall 
be  strong  as  iron  :  forasmuch  as  iron  breaketh  in  pieces 
and  subdueth  all  things  :  and  as  iron  that  crusheth  all 

41  these,  shall  it  break  in  pieces  and  crush.  And  whereas 
thou  sawest  the  feet  and  toes,  part  of  potters'  clay,  and 
part  of  iron,  it  shall  be  a  divided  kingdom  ;  but  there 
shall  be  in  it  of  the  strength   of  the  iron,   forasmuch 

42  as  thou  sawest  the  iron  mixed  with  ^miry  clay.  And  as 
the  toes  of  the  feet  were  part  of  iron,  and  part  of  clay,  so 
the  kingdom  shall  be  partly  strong,  and  partly  ^>  broken. 

43  And  whereas  thou  sawest  the  iron  mixed  with  » miry 
clay,  they  shall  mingle  themselves  cwith  the  seed  of 
men ;  but  they  shall  not  cleave  one  to  another,  even 

44  as  iron  doth  not  mingle  with  clay.     And  in  the  days 

*  Or,  earthenware  ''  Or,  brittle  '^  Or,  by 

40.  The  Macedonian  empire.  Tiiis  kingdom  is  symbolized  b3' 
iron  in  reference  to  its  power  under  its  founder  Alexander.  Its 
division  into  several  kingdoms  and  the  relative  strength  and 
weakness  of  these  are  symbolized  by  the  mingling  of  iron  and 
clay. 

forasxnucli  as  iron  breaketh  in  pieces  .  .  .  shall  it  break 
in  pieces  and  crush.  There  can  hardly  be  a  question  as  to  the 
text  here  being  corrupt.  First  of  all  the  clause  *  and  as  iron  that 
crusheth  all  these'  is  to  be  removed  as  a  disturbing  gloss.  It  is 
not  found  in  Theod.,  Vulg  ,  and  the  Peshitto.  Next  a  comparison 
of  the  LXX  here,  which  ends  with  the  words  'all  the  earth,' 
with  vii.  23  makes  it  highly  probable  that  these  words  are  original. 
For  the  details  of  the  following  restoration  the  reader  is  referred 
to  the  present  Editor's  larger  Commentar}'.  The  reconstructed 
text  would  read:  'And  the  fourth  kingdom  shall  be  strong  as 
iron  :  for  as  iron  breaketh  in  pieces  and  shattereth  all  things, 
so  shall  it  break  in  pieces  and  crush  the  whole  earth.' 

41.  and  toes.     Omitted  by  the  LXX. 

a  divided  kingdom.  These  words  refer  to  the  dismember- 
ment of  Alexander's  kingdom  among  the  Diadochi.    See  xi.  5  note. 

43.  This  verse  refers  to  the  marriages  between  the  Seleucidae 
(i.  e.  the  iron)  and  the  Ptolemies  (i.  e.  the  clay).     Cf.  xi.  6,  17, 

44.  in  the  days :  i.  e.  of  the  Seleucidae,  more  particularly  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes  (175-164  b.  c.)  during  whose  reign  the 
advent  of  the  kingdom  was  expected  by  our  author. 


DANIEL  2.  45,  46  27 

of  those  kings  shall  the  God  of  heaven  set  up  a  kingdom, 
which  shall  never  be  destroyed,  nor  shall  the  sovereignty 
thereof  be  left  to  another  people ;  but  it  shall  break  in 
pieces  and  consume  all  these  kingdoms,  and  it  shall 
stand  for  ever.  Forasmuch  as  thou  sawest  that  a  stone  45 
was  cut  out  of  the  mountain  without  hands,  and  that 
it  brake  in  pieces  the  iron,  the  brass,  the  clay,  the  silver, 
and  the  gold ;  the  great  God  hath  made  known  to  the 
king  what  shall  come  to  pass  hereafter :  and  the  dream 
is  certain,  and  the  interpretation  thereof  sure.    Then  the  46 


nor  ...  to  another  people.  The  kingdom  is  to  belong  to 
the  Jews  for  evermore. 

45.  the  iron,  the  brass,  the  clay.  Read  :  'the  clay,  the  iron, 
the  brass.'     See  note  on  ver.  35. 

a  g'reat  God.  The  R.V.  wrongly  renders  '  the  great  God.' 
Our  author  is  here  addressing  a  heathen  king  and  speaks  from  his 
standpoint. 

the  dream  is  certain.  Daniel  concludes  with  a  solemn 
affirmation  of  the  truth  of  the  dream  and  its  interpretation  after 
the  manner  of  Apocalypses.  Cf.  viii.  26,  xi.  2,  xii.  7,  Rev.  xix.  9, 
xxi.  5,  xxii.  6. 

46-9.  The  king  recognizes  the  superiority  of  the  Jewish 
religion,  bestows  high  honours  on  Daniel,  and  exalts  his  three 
companions  at  Daniel's  request. 

46.  That  the  homage  rendered  to  Daniel  by  the  king  was  not 
simply  such  as  was  paid  to  Haman  in  Esther  iii.  2  is  clear  from  the 
command  *to  offer  an  oblation  and  sweet  odours'  to  Daniel.  As 
Bevan  well  remarks,  *  Nebuchadnezzar  at  the  feet  of  Daniel 
represents  the  Gentile  power  humbled  before  Israel  (cf  Isa.  xlix. 
23,  Ix.  14).'  We  have  a  good  parallel  in  the  legendary  account 
of  Josephus  (Ani.  xi.  8.  5),  according  to  which  Alexander  the 
Great  prostrated  himself  before  the  Jewish  high  priest,  and  justified 
himself  in  so  doing  in  the  words:  '  I  do  not  adore  him,  but  that 
God  who  hath  honoured  him  with  His  high  priesthood.'  Jerome 
writes  :  *  Non  tam  Danielem  quam  in  Daniele  adorat  Deum,  qui 
mysteria  revelavit '  (BehrmannX  The  words  'bowed  down  to' 
are  ambiguous  in  themselves ;  but,  as  we  have  already  observed, 
the  close  of  the  verse  represents  Daniel  as  accepting  divine  honours 
in  contrast  to  the  action  of  the  Apostles  in  Acts  xiv.  13-18.  And 
yet  the  king's  homage  though  ostensibly  offered  to  Daniel  was  in 
reality  paid  to  Daniel's  God,  as  ver.  47  declares. 


28  DANIEL  2.  47-49 

king  Nebuchadnezzar  fell  upon  his  face,  and  worshipped 
Daniel,  and  commanded  that  they  should  offer  an  obla- 

47  tion  and  sweet  odours  unto  him.  The  king  answered 
unto  Daniel,  and  said,  Of  a  truth  your  God  is  the  God  of 
gods,  and  the  Lord  of  kings,  and  a  revealer  of  secrets, 

48  seeing  thou  hast  been  able  to  reveal  this  secret.  Then 
the  king  made  Daniel  great,  and  gave  him  many  great 
gifts,  and  made  him  to  rule  over  the  whole  province  of 
Babylon,  and  to  be  chief  governor  over  all  the  wise  men 

49  of  Babylon.  And  Daniel  requested  of  the  king,  and  he 
appointed  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  over  the 
affairs  of  the  province  of  Babylon :  but  Daniel  was  *  in 
the  gate  of  the  king. 

*  Or,  at  the  king's  court 

fell  upon  Ms  face.  '  A  mark  of  respect — whether  to  God,  as 
Gen.  xvii.  3,  or  to  man,  2  Sam.  ix.  6,  xiv.  4.' — Driver. 

worshipped  Daniel.  The  word  used  here  for  worship  is  used 
in  iii.  5,  6,  7,  10,  1 1,  15,  18,  &c.  But,  as  Driver  points  out,  it  is  used 
in  the  Targums  *of  obeisance  done  to  a  human  superior  (as  2  Sam. 
xiv.  33,  xviii.  21,28,  xxiv.  20);  so  that  it  does  not  necessarily 
imply  the  payment  of  divine  honour.' 

sweet  odours:  lit.  'quietings,'  '  soothings.' — Theod.  cuwSm?. 
Only  here  and  in  Ezra  vi.  10  is  it  found  used  absolutely  instead  of 
the  usual  sacrificial  expression  'odour  of  a  sweet  smell'  =  6afir)v 
(vojSins,  as  in  Gen.  viii.  21,   Lev.  i.  9,  13,  &c. 

47.  the  God  of  gods,  and  the  Lord  of  kings.  This  is  the  text 
implied  by  the  LXX  but  not  quite  by  the  Massoretic,  which  should 
rather  be  rendered  as  in  the  A,V.  *  a  God  of  gods  and  Lord  of 
kings,'  or  '  a  God  over  gods  and  Lord  over  kings  '  (see  Kautzsch, 
Grammatik  d.  Bibl.  Aram.,  p.  146).  The  Targum  on  Ps.  cxxxvi.  a 
gives  the  equivalent  of  the  LXX  here.  This  indefinite  title  recurs 
in  xi.  36,  which  may  be  contrasted  with  the  definite  title  in 
Deut.  X.  17. 

48.  chief  governor  :  lit.  *  the  chief  of  the  deputies.'  The  word 
'deputy,'  i.e.  segan,  recurs  in  iii.  2,  3,  27,  vi.  6.  It  is  found  also 
in  the  Hebrew  in  the  form  5a^««  — both  forms  being  borrowed 
from  the  Assyrian. 

49.  This  verse  serves  to  introduce  ch.  iii. 

was  in  the  gate  of  the  king,  i.e.  remained  at  court.  Cf. 
Esther  ii.  19,  21. 


DANIEL  3.  I,  2  29 

Nebuchadnezzar   the  king    made  an  image  of  gold,  3 
whose  height  was  threescore  cubits,  and   the   breadth 
thereof  six  cubits :    he  set  it  up  in  the  plain  of  Dura, 
in  the  province  of  Babylon.     Then  Nebuchadnezzar  the  3 
king  sent  to  gather  together  the  satraps,  the  deputies, 


iii.  The  object  of  this  chapter  is  to  encourage  the  Jews  not 
to  acknowledge  in  any  way  any  heathen  reh'gion,  but  to  hold  fast 
at  all  costs  to  their  own,  the  truth  of  which  has  been  established 
in  chap,  ii,  and  to  prefer  death  to  apostasy.  In  such  circumstances 
their  confession  and  action  were  to  be  those  of  the  three  youths  : 

*  There  is  a  God,  whom  we  serve,  who  is  able  to  deliver  us  .  .  .  and 
he  will  deliver  us  out  of  thine  hand,  O  king:  but  if  not.  .  .we 
will  not  serve  thy  gods'  (17-18). 

1.  The  LXX,  Theod.,  and  the  Pesh.  begin  this  verse  with  the 
words  '  In  the  eighteenth  year '  (i.e.  of  Nebuchadnezzar).  This 
would  be  the  year  before  Jerusalem  was  taken  (2  Kings  xxv.  8). 
As  this  date  recurs  in  the  LXX  at  the  beginning  of  chap,  iv,  and 
as  they  can  hardly  follow  thus  upon  each  other,  Jahn  suggests 
that  these  two  chapters  originally  formed  part  of  independent 
writings. 

an  image  of  gold  .  .  .  threescore  cubits.  The  image  was 
not  necessarily  of  solid  gold.  The  golden  altar  in  Exod.  xxxix.  38 
was  merely  covered  with  gold  (Exod.  xxx.  3).  Such  colossal 
statues  were  rather  affected  amongst  Orientals.  Herodotus 
(i.  183)  speaks  of  a  great  golden  statue  of  Zeus  in  the  temple  of 
Belus  in  Babylon,  and  Nestle  {Marginalia,  p.  35)  reminds  us  of 
the  mention  in  Ammianus  Marcellinus  of  a  colossal  golden  statue 
erected  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes  in  the  temple  of  Daphne  at 
Antioch. 

plain  of  Dura.  Though  three  localities  are  mentioned  in  the 
tablets  bearing  the  name  Duru  (Delitzsch,  Paradies,p.  216),  and 
several  Babylonian  cities  had  names  compounded  with  Dur,  the 
plain  of  Dura  has  not  been  identified.  Driver  calls  attention  to 
Oppert's  suggestion  that  one  of  the  many  mounds — called  Mounds 
of  Dura — near  to  a  small  river  called  the  Dura,  which  falls  into  the 
Euphrates  about  six  miles  below  Babylon,  may  have  formed  the 
pedestal  of  a  colossal  image. 

2.  satraps.     The  form  in  the  Old  Persian  is  khshatra-pawan, 

*  warden  of  the  realm,'  of  which  the  Aramaic  'ahashdarpan  and 
the  Greek  aaTpdTrrjs  are  corruptions.  The  title  is  a  Persian  one 
(cf.  Ezra  viii.  36,  Esther  iii.  12,  &c.)  and  not  a  Babylonian,  and 
is  accordingly  an  anachronism  here. 

deputies.     See  ii.  48. 

F  2 


3©  DANIELS.  3-5 

and  the  governors,  the  »*  judges,  the  treasurers,  the  coun- 
sellors, the  ^  sheriffs,  and  all  the  rulers  of  the  provinces, 
to  come  to  the  dedication  of  the  image  which  Nebuchad- 

3  nezzar  the  king  had  set  up.  Then  the  satraps,  the 
deputies,  and  the  governors,  the  *  judges,  the  treasurers, 
the  counsellors,  the  ^sheriffs,  and  all  the  rulers  of  the 
provinces,  were  gathered  together  unto  the  dedication  of 
the  image  that  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king  had  set  up ; 
and  they  stood  before  the  image  that  Nebuchadnezzar 

4  had  set  up.     Then  the  herald  cried  aloud,  To  you  it  is 

5  commanded,  O  peoples,  nations,  and  languages,  that  at 
what  time  ye  hear  the  sound  of  the  cornet,  flute,  harp, 

*  Or,  chief  soothsayers  ^  Or,  lawyers 

gfovernors.  Aramaic  pehah,  from  the  Assyrian  paj}dti.  The 
word  is  of  frequent  occurrence  also  in  Hebrew,  especially  in  the 
post-Exilic  books. 

judges.  Aramaic  ^ adargdzar,  a  Persian  loan-word  =  andarza- 
ghar,  'counsellor.'  But  E.  Meyer  thinks  it  means  'general  in 
chief.'  The  marginal  reading  of  R.V.  *  chief  soothsayer,"  implies  a 
different  derivation. 

treasurer.  Aram,  g^dabar.  This  word  is  taken  by  some 
scholars  to  be  a  secondary  form  of gizbar,  'treasurer'  (Ezra  i.  8, 
vii.  2i).  According  to  Graetz  it  is  a  scribal  error  for  hadddbar, 
which  occurs  in  vss.  24  (see  note),  27,  iv.  36,  vi.  7. 

counsellors.  Aram,  d^thabar,  from  the  Old  Persian  ddtabara, 
from  ddt,  *  law'  and  bar  =  '  law  bearer.'  This  word  has,  as  Driver 
observes,  been  found  recently  by  Hilprecht  in  the  Nippur  inscrip- 
tions of  the  time  of  Artaxerxes  I  and  Darius  II. 

sheriflfs.  Aram,  tiphtdyd.  According  to  Andreas  this  should 
be  corrected  into  denpetayye  =  Middle  Persian  denpet,  '  chief  reli- 
gious official,'  If  this  is  right,  the  above  rendering  must  be 
corrected.  Behrmann  compares  the  Old  Persian  word  adipati, 
*  chief  official.'  The  marginal  reading  in  R.V.  'lawyers'  is  based 
on  the  very  improbable  view  that  it  is  connected  with  qftd,  'to 
advise,'  of  which  mufti  is  the  participle, 

4.  peoples,  nations,  and  languagres.     Cf.  7,  29,  iv.  i,  v.  19. 
vi.  25,  vii.  14  :  Rev,  v,  9,  vii.  9,  &c. 

5.  cornet,  lit.  '  horn.'     The  word  keren  is  used  here  and  in  7, 
10,  15,  and  in  Syriac  in  the  same  sense  as  the  Hebrew  shophar. 

flute.     Aram,  mashrokitha,  from  sh/rak,  'to  hiss.' 


DANIEL  3.  6-8  3r 

Sackbut,   psaltery,   » dulcimer,   and    all   kinds  of  music, 
ye  fall  down  and  worship  the  golden  image  that  Nebu- 
chadnezzar the  king  hath  set  up  :  and  whoso  falleth  not  6 
down  and  worshippeth  shall  the  same  hour  be  cast  into 
the  midst  of  a  burning  fiery  furnace.     Therefore  at  that  7 
time,  when  all  the  peoples  heard  the  sound  of  the  cornet, 
flute,  harp,  sackbut,  psaltery,  and  all  kinds  of  music,  all 
the  peoples,  the  nations,  and  the  languages,  fell  down 
and  worshipped  the  golden  image  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
the  king  had  set  up.     Wherefore  at  that  time  certain  8 
Chaldeans  came  near,  and  brought  accusation  against 
*  Or,  bagpipe 

harp.  Aram,  kith'ros  (or  kitharis  according  to  Kamphausen) 
is  the  Greek  KiOapis. 

sackbut.  Aram,  sabb^ka,  which  is  identical  with  the  Greek 
ffan^vKT],  though  whether  the  borrowing  was  done  by  the  Greeks 
or  by  the  Semites  is  uncertain.  The  sackbut  was  a  triangular 
four-stringed  instrument.  Athenaeus  ^iv.  175  d)  states  that  it  was 
a  Syrian  invention. 

psaltery.  Aram,  psanierin,  i.  e.  ipaKTfjpiov  :  also  in  7,  to,  15. 
This  '  was  a  stringed  instrument,  of  triangular  sl)ape,  like  an 
inverted  A.  It  differed  from  the  ciihara  (as  Augustine  repeatedly 
states)  in  having  the  sounding-board  above  the  strings,  which 
were  played  with  a  plectrum  and  struck  downwards'  (Driver). 

dulcimer.  In  marg.  'bagpipe.'  Aram,  sumponydh,  i.e.  the 
Greek  avpLcpcuvia.  This  instrument  is  mentioned  again  in  10  but 
omitted  in  7.  *  It  was  probably  a  goat-skin  bag  with  two  reed 
pipes,  the  one  used  as  a  mouthpiece  to  fill  the  bag,  .  .  ,  and 
the  other  employed  as  a  chanter-flute  with  finger  holes'  (Encyc. 
Bib.  III.  3230),  Bevan  (p.  41'  has  observed  that  the  avficpcvvia.  as 
the  name  of  an  instrument,  is  peculiar  to  late  Greek  and  that  it  is 
specially  mentioned  by  Polybius  xxvi.  p.  1151,  ed.  Hultsch'  as 
a  favourite  instrument  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  while  Nestle  has 
adduced  another  passage  from  Polybius  xxxi.  4),  which  states 
that  the  king  used  to  dance  to  the  sound  of  the  bagpipe  (rfji 
avfjxpcuviai  irpOKaKovfitvijs  .  .  .  aipxfiTo). 

8-12.  The  three  Jewish  youths  accnsed  of  not  falling  down 
before  the  image. 

8.  brought  accusation.  The  phrase  in  the  original  is  peculiar  : 
it  literally  means  :  *  ate  the  pieces  of.'  It  means  :  'to  denounce' 
and  then  *  to  slander.'    It  was  in  use  throughout  the  entire  Semitic 


32  DANIEL  3.  9-14 

9  the  Jews.     They  answered  and  said  to  Nebuchadnezzar 

10  the  king,  O  king,  Hve  for  ever.  Thou,  O  king,  hast 
made  a  decree,  that  every  man  that  shall  hear  the  sound 
of  the  cornet,  flute,  harp,  sackbut,  psaltery,  and  dulcimer, 
and  all  kinds  of  music,  shall  fall  down  and  worship  the 

11  golden  image :  and  whoso  falleth  not  down  and  wor- 
shippeth,  shall  be  cast  into  the  midst  of  a  burning  fiery 

12  furnace.  There  are  certain  Jews  whom  thou  hast  ap- 
pointed over  the  affairs  of  the  province  of  Babylon, 
Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego ;  these  men,  O  king, 
have  not  regarded  thee :    they  serve  not  thy  gods,  nor 

13  worship  the  golden  image  which  thou  hast  set  up.  Then 
Nebuchadnezzar  in  his  rage  and  fury  commanded  to 
bring  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego.     Then  they 

14  brought  these  men  before  the  king.  Nebuchadnezzar 
answered  and  said  unto  them.  Is  it  of  purpose,  O  Sha- 
drach, Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  that  ye  serve  not  my 

world;  for  it  is  found  in  the  Tel-el-Amarna  letters  :  in  the  Syriac, 
where  ''dkhel  karzd  (i.  e.  *  eater  of  pieces  ')  is  the  rendering  of 
V  ^id0o\o5,  and  in  the  Koran. 

12.  have  not  reg-arded  thee.  The  Aramaic  here  is  peculiar. 
If  the  meaning  universally  assigned  to  it  by  scholars  is  right,  then 
to /Vw  must  be  given  a  signification,  i.e.  'deference,'  'respect,' 
which  it  bears  only  here  and  in  vi.  13.  But  if  we  turn  to  the 
Greek  versions  and  the  Vulgate  we  find  that  they  presuppose 
a  different  text,  i.  e.  'they  have  not  hearkened  to  thy  command.' 
For  the  detailed  criticism  of  this  passage  and  of  vi.  13,  and  the 
reconstruction  of  the  text,  see  my  larger  Commentary. 

thy  gods.     We  should,  with    Q^ri,  read    'thy  god,'    as  in 
14,  18,  iv.  8. 

14.  Is  it  of  purpose?     To  obtain  this  sense  we  must  suppose 

w^^rr  to  be  a  Hebraism  equivalent  to  rm^  (Num.  xxxv.  20,  22)  = 
'iying  in  wait,'  which  is  derived  from  the  rare  root  m:?  (see 
Lexicon).  The  initial  n  would  then  be  the  interrogative.  But 
it  is  better  with  Bevan,  Behrmann,  and  Driver  to  take  it  as 
a  corruption  of  xr.sn  =  '  is  it  true  ?  '  This  word  is  already  found 
in  ii.  5,  8.     C(.  Theod.  ft  dK-qdivs. 

my   god.    So  the    Erfurter    MS.     Cf.   iv.   8.      Other    MSS. 
'my  gods.' 


DANIEL  3.  15-17  33 

god,  nor  worship  the  golden  image  which  I  have  set  up? 
Now  if  ye  be  ready  that  at  what  time  ye  hear  the  iound  15 
of  the  cornet,  flute,  harp,  sackbut,  psaltery,  and  dulcimer, 
and  all  kinds  of  music,  ye  fall  down  and  worship  the 
image  which  I  have  made,  ivell-.  but  if  ye  worship  not, 
ye  shall  be  cast  the  same  hour  into  the  midst  of  a  burn- 
ing fiery  furnace ;  and  who  is  that  god  that  shall  deliver 
you  out  of  my  hands  ?     Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-  16 
nego,  answered  and  said  to  the  king,  O  Nebuchadnezzar, 
'"^  we  have  no  need  to  answer  thee  in  this  matter.     ^  If  it  17 
be  so,  our  God  whom  we  serve  is  able  to  deliver  us  from 

*  Or^  we  are  not  careful 

^  Or,  Behold.,  our  God  ^c.  Or,  If  our  God  whom  we  serve  be  able 
to  deliver  us,  he  will  deliver  us  from  .  .  .  and  out  of  thine  hand, 
O  king 

15.  well.  For  like  aposiopeses  after  conditional  sentences  cf. 
Exod.  xxxii.  32,  Judges  ix.  i6sqq. 

who  is  that  god  ?    Rather  '  what  god  ? '    or  '  is  there  any 
god?'     See  Kautzsch,  Graiitm.,  p.  155. 

16.  we  have  no  need  to  answer,  &c.  The  three  youths  refuse 
to  discuss  a  question  which  must  be  left  to  God  Himself. 

17.  If  it  be  so  .  .  .  to  deliver  us.  The  king  has  asked  :  '  Is 
there  any  god  who  can  deliver  you  ?  '  To  this  question  this  verse 
should  supply  the  answer,  but  in  such  a  way  as  to  harmonize 
witli  ver.  16  where  the  youths  have  refused  to  debate  the  question. 
Hence  ver.  17  should  explain  ver.  16  while  answering  ver.  15, 
and  hence  further,  we  should  expect  ver.  17  to  begin  with  *  for ' 
or  some  sucli  word.  *  We  have  no  need  to  discuss  this  matter  ; 
for  the  God  whom  we  serve  either  will  or  will  not  save  us.'  Deeds 
not  words  will  answer  the  question.  If  this  is  the  meaning  of 
the  context,  it  is  clear  that  the  words  'if  it  be  so'  cannot  be 
right,  and  that  it  is  the  true  sense  is  confirmed  by  the  four 
versions,  LXX,  Theod.,  Pesh.,  Vulg.,  all  of  which  begin  ver.  17 
with  '  for.' 

But  almost  all  modern  scholars  (and  R.V.  in  marg.),  following 
the  Massoretic  punctuation,  give  a  different  rendering  of  ver.  17  : 
*  If  our  God,  whom  we  serve,  be  able  to  deliver  us,  He  will 
deliver  us,'  &c.  Against  this  form  of  the  text  there  are,  I  think, 
two  objections.  1°.  It  can  hardly  be  that  such  strong  champions 
of  their  God  would  for  a  moment  admit  that  He  was  unable  to 
deliver  them,  and  that  to  a  heathen  king.     They  could  admit  the 


34  DANIEL  3.  .8-21 

the  burning  fiery  furnace ;   and  he  will  deliver  us  out 

18  of  thine  hand,  O  king.  But  if  not,  be  it  known  unto 
thee,  O  king,  that  we  will  not  serve  thy  gods,  nor  worship 

19  the  golden  image  which  thou  hast  set  up.  Then  was 
Nebuchadnezzar  full  of  fury,  and  the  form  of  his  visage 
was  changed  against  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed- 
nego :  therefore  he  spake,  and  commanded  that  they 
should  heat  the  furnace  seven  times  more  than  it  was 

30  wont  to  be  heated.  And  he  commanded  certain  mighty 
men  that  were  in  his  army  to  bind  Shadrach,  Meshach, 
and  Abed-nego,  and  to  cast  them  into  the  burning  fiery 

21  furnace.     Then  these  men  were  bound  in  their  hosen, 

their  '^tunics,  and  their  mantles,  and  their  other  garments, 

*  Or,  turbans 

possibility  of  His  not  saving  them,  but  not  His  inabilitj'  to  save. 
2°.  If  we  may  reason  from  other  passages,  when  Uthai  forms  one  idea 
with  a  participle,  they  should  not  be  separated  by  any  intervening 
words  as  they  are  in  this  passage.  If  this  conclusion  is  just,  then 
the  above  translation  is  inadmissible.  Further,  from  i",  it  follows 
that  even  if  it  were  admissible,  it  is  inappropriate. 

We  must,  therefore,  fall  back  on  the  versions  for  the  original 
text.  These  (see  my  larger  Commentary)  clearly  require  the 
following  :  '  For  there  is  a  God,  whom  we  serve,  who  is  able  to 
deliver  us.'  This  forms  a  fitting  answer  to  the  king's  question  : 
'  Is  there  any  God  who  can  deliver  you  1 '  They  answer  first  that 
there  is  such  a  God,  and  that  it  is  the  God  whom  they  serve. 

18.  But  if  not:  i.e.  'but  if  He  will  not  deliver  us.' 

tliy  gods.  Read  '  thy  god  '  as  in  iv.  8.  Bel  was  the  special 
patron  deity  of  the  king. 

19-27.  The  deliverance  of  the  three  youths  front  the  burning 
fiery  furnace. 

19.  full  of.     Render  '  filled  with.' 

21.  hosen  .  .  .  tunics  .  .  .  mautles.  Better  render  '  mantles 
. . .  trousers  . . .  hats.'  For  a  discussion  of  these  words  see  Driver  : 
for  the  evidence  of  the  versions  which  is  very  confused  see  my 
larger  Commentar3\ 

hosen:  sarbal  rather  means  'mantle.'  Such  is  its  meaning 
in  the  Talmud. 

tunics  :  patiish  rather  means  '  trousers.'  Theod.  gives  -mpi- 
KVijfitaiy  the  LXX  rd  vnobrjfiaTa  avrwv. 


DANIEL  3.  33-26  35 

aiid  were  cast  into  the  midst  of  the  burning  fiery  furnace. 
Therefore  because  the  king's  commandment  was  urgent,  22 
and  the  furnace  exceeding  hot,  the  flame  of  the  fire  slew 
those  men  that  took  up  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed- 
nego.     And  these  three  men,  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  33 
Abed-nego,  fell  down  bound  into  the  midst  of  the  burn- 
ing fiery  furnace.     Then  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king  was  24 
astonied,  and  rose  up  in  haste :  he  spake  and  said  unto 
his  counsellors,  Did  not  we  cast  three  men  bound  into 
the  midst  of  the  fire  ?     They  answered  and  said  unto 
the  king.  True,  O  king.     He  answered  and  said,  Lo,  25 
I  see  four  men  loose,  walking  in  the  midst  of  the  fire, 
and  they  have  no  hurt ;   and  the  aspect  of  the  fourth 
is  like  a  son  of  the  gods.     Then  Nebuchadnezzar  came  26 

mantles.  Rather :  '  hats.'  The  LXX  gives  napas,  Theod. 
Tiapais.  In  post-Biblical  Hebrew  karbal  denotes  a  covering  for 
the  head. 

23.  This  verse  is  an  otiose  repetition  of  21''.  It  is  omitted 
by  the  LXX.  If  it  is  original,  it  should  probably  be  read  after 
22,  omitting  the  words  :  '  these  three  men  .  .  .  Abed-nego.' 
On  the  other  hand,  some  clauses  seem  to  have  been  lost  in  the 
Aramaic,  which  would  explain  Nebuchadnezzar's  astonishment. 
Accordingly  von  Gall,  Bludau,  and  Rothstein  have  suggested  that 
verses  46-50,  24,  as  they  appear  in  the  Greek  addition  in  LXX 
and  Theod.,  stood  originally  in  the  Semitic.  After  v.  23  the  LXX 
and  Theod.  add  a  passage  of  67  verses,  i.  e.  24-90 ;  vv.  24-45 
the  prayer  of  Azarias  :  a  descriptive  passage  46-50  telling  of  the 
destruction  of  the  executioners,  the  descent  of  the  angel,  the 
doxology  uttered  by  the  three  j'ouths  52-6,  and  the  hymn  known 
as  the  Benedict te  57-90. 

That  something  is  lost  seems  quite  clear.  The  lost  passage  on 
which  46-50,  24  are  based  dealt  with  what  the  king  saw :  i.  e.  an 
angel  ('the  fourth  is  like  a  son  of  the  gods,'  ver.  25  :  '  His  angel,' 
ver.  28)  descending  into  the  furnace  :  the  three  youths  set  free 
from  their  bonds  and  walking  unhurt  in  the  furnace. 

24.  astonied.     Rather  'startled"  or  'alarmed.' 
counsellors.    Aram,  haddaherin  is  peculiar  to  Daniel,  ver.  27. 

iv.  36,  vi.  7.     The  etymology  is  uncertain. 

25.  loose.     The  fire  had  merely  destroyed  their  bonds. 

a  son  of  the  gods :  i.  e.  an  angel.     Cf.  Gen.  vi,  2,  Job  i.  6. 


36  DANIEL  3.  27-29 

near  to  the  *  mouth  of  the  burning  fiery  furnace :  he 
spake  and  said,  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  ye 
servants  of  the  Most  High  God,  come  forth,  and  come 
hither.  Then  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  came 
37  forth  out  of  the  midst  of  the  fire.  And  the  satraps,  the 
deputies,  and  the  governors,  and  the  king's  counsellors, 
being  gathered  together,  saw  these  men,  that  the  fire 
had  no  power  upon  their  bodies,  nor  was  the  hair  of 
their  head  singed,  neither  were  their  hosen  changed,  nor 

28  had  the  smell  of  fire  passed  on  them.  Nebuchadnezzar 
spake  and  said,  Blessed  be  the  God  of  Shadrach,  Me- 
shach, and  Abed-nego,  who  hath  sent  his  angel,  and 
delivered  his  servants  that  trusted  in  him,  and  have 
changed  the  king's  word,  and  have  yielded  their  bodies, 
that  they  might  not  serve  nor  worship  any  god,  except 

29  their  own  God.  Therefore  I  make  a  decree,  that  every 
people,  nation,  and  language,  which  speak  any  thing 
amiss  against  the  God  of  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed- 
nego,  shall  be  cut  in  pieces,  and  their  houses  shall  be 
made  a  dunghill :   because  there  is  no  other  god  that 

*  Aram.  door. 


26.  Most  Higrh  God.  Cf.  iv.  2,  v.  i8,  21.  The  title  '  Most 
High'  is  found  in  iv.  17,  24,  25,  32,  34,  vii.  25.  This  title  was 
used  by  Jews  and  also  by  heathen  speakers  ;  cf.  Isa.  xiv,  14, 
Tob.  i.  13,  I  Esdras  ii.  3,  vi.  31,  Mark  v.  7,  Acts  xvi.  17.  It  is 
very  frequent  in  i  Enoch,  Test.  Twelve  Patriarchs,  Jubilees,  Ass. 
Moses. 

27.  The  gradation  is  obvious  :  the  hair  is  not  singed,  the 
flowing  mantles  not  hurt,  and  even  the  smell  of  fire  had  not  passed 
on  them. 

hosen.     Rather  'mantles,'     Cf.  ver.  21. 

28.  Doxology  of  the  king. 

29.  His  decree  of  toleration. 

I  make  a  decree.     Cf.  iv.  6,  Ezra  iv.  19,  21,  &c 
people,  nation,  and  languagre.     Cf.  ver.  4,  7. 
out  in  pieces  .  .  .  dunghill.     See  ii.  5,  note. 


DANIEL  3.  30—4.  I  37 

is  able  to  deliver  after  this  sort.    Then  the  king  promoted  30 
Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego,  in  the  province  of 
Babylon. 

Nebuchadnezzar  the  king,  unto  all  the  peoples,  nations,  4 

iv.  There  are  two  forms  of  this  chapter.  In  the  Masso- 
retic  text,  which  is  followed  by  Theodotion,  the  Vulgate,  and  the 
Peshitto,  the  entire  narrative  is  given  in  the  form  of  an  edict  or 
letter  of  Nebuchadnezzar  to  all  his  subjects.  It  begins  with  a  greeting 
to  'all  the  peoples,  nations,  and  languages  that  dwell  in  all  the 
earth,'  and  proceeds  to  state  the  king's  desire  to  make  known  to 
ihem  the  signs  and  wonders  that  the  Most  High  had  wrought 
upon  him  (1-3).  He  then  recounts  a  dream  which  troubled  him, 
and  tells  how  he  summoned  the  magicians,  enchanters,  Chaldeans, 
and  soothsaj'ers  to  make  known  its  interpretation  (4-6),  and  that 
when  they  failed^  Daniel  was  brought  before  him  7-8).  To  him 
the  king  set  forth  his  dream  (9-18),  which  Daniel  forthwith  inter- 
preted (19-27).  Within  a  year  the  dream  was  fulfilled,  and  the 
king  driven  forth  to  live  with  the  beasts  of  the  field  (28-33). 
At  the  end  of  seven  times  the  king's  reason  returned  unto  him, 
and  he  was  restored  unto  his  kingdom,  and  so  he  praised  and 
honoured  and  extolled  the  God  of  heaven  (34-37). 

Turning  now  to  the  LXX  we  observe  first  of  all  that  there  is 
nothing  in  it  corresponding  to  the  first  three  verses  in  the  Masso 
retic,  which  transform  the  next  thirty-four  verses  into  an  edict. 
This  chapter  begins  simply,  in  the  LXX,  with  the  words  :  'And 
in  the  eighteenth  year  of  his  reign  Nebuchadnezzar  said  :  I  Nebu- 
chadnezzar was  at  rest  in  mine  house  '  :  then  follows  in  the  same 
narrative  form  the  next  thirty-three  verses.  At  their  close  comes  the 
edict  as  a  result  of  the  king's  spiritual  and  psychical  experiences, 
in  which  are  embodied  verj'  many  of  the  phrases  in  iv.  1-3. 

A  close  study  of  the  texts  and  versions  has  forced  me  to  con- 
clude that  the  older  order  of  the  text  is  preserved  in  the  LXX 
and  not  in  the  Aramaic.  The  complete  evidence  for  this  conclusion 
will  be  found  in  my  larger  Commentary.  Here  I  will  shortly 
indicate  a  few  of  the  chief  grounds  without  going  into  details. 

1°.  The  LXX  in  chap,  iv  follows  the  analogy  of  the  preceding 
chapter,  which  first  gives  an  account  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  experi- 
ences in  relation  to  the  three  Hebrew  children,  and  then  appends, 
as  their  natural  sequel,  the  king's  edict  against  idolatry  at  the  close 
of  the  chapter.  The  analogy  of  chap,  iii,  therefore,  supports  the 
general  form  into  which  the  matter  is  cast  in  chapter  iv. 

2°,  But  not  only  is  the  order  in  the  LXX  the  more  reasonable 
and  confirmed  by  the  analogy  of  chapter  iii.  but  traces  still  sur- 
vive in  the   Massoretic  which  show  that  it  is  a  secondary  form 


38  DANIEL  4.  i 

and  languages,  that  dwell  in  all  the  earth ;   peace  be 

or  recast  of  a  text  which  observed  tlie  same  order  as  the  LXX, 
that  is,  a  narrative  of  thirty-four  verses  followed  by  a  royal  edict; 
for  in  verses  19,  28-33  the  narrative  form  prevails  in  which  the 
king  is  spoken  of  in  the  third  person.  The  redactor  has  here 
forgotten  to  transform  these  features  of  the  narrative  form  into 
that  of  the  edict  form.  Plenty  of  analogies  for  such  acts  of 
editorial  carelessness  exist  elsewhere. 

3°.  The  LXX  shows  its  superior  text  in  omitting  verses  6-9, 
which  recount  the  king's  summons  of  all  the  wise  men  to  inter- 
pret his  dream,  and  their  failure  to  do  so,  and  then  finallj'  the 
appearance  of  Daniel,  to  whom  the  king  narrates  his  dream. 
The  LXX,  on  the  other  hand,  by  omitting  all  mention  of  the  wise 
men  and  representing  the  king  as  at  once  sending  for  Daniel  in 
verse  18,  puts  the  action  of  the  king  in  a  reasonable  light.  For 
considering  the  knowledge  which  the  king  had  gained  of  Daniel's 
powers  as  an  interpreter  of  dreams,  and  Daniel's  subsequent  high 
position  in  the  court,  it  seems  unnatural  that  he  should  be  sum- 
moned last  of  all.  Here  again  the  order  of  the  LXX  seems  more 
original.  But  this  is  not  all.  A  comparison  of  these  four  verses 
\'\v.  6-g  with  ii.  2-7  tends  to  show  that  the  former  are  secondary 
to  the  latter.  In  chapter  ii  the  king  requires  the  wise  men  to  tell 
him  both  the  dream  and  its  interpretation,  since  the  king  had 
forgotten  his  dream.  But  though  in  this  chapter,  according  to 
ver.  7,  the  king  remembered  his  dream,  for  in  vv.  10-17  he  recounts 
it  at  length,  yet  in  ver.  g,  if  the  text  is  trustworthy,  the  king 
requires  Daniel  to  tell  him  his  dream  and  its  interpretation.  If 
the  text  is  correctly  transmitted  the  passage  is  secondary.  If  the 
passage  is  original  it  must  be  emended. 

The  source  of  the  historical  statements  in  this  chapter.  It  is  now 
generally  agreed  that  there  is  nothing  to  be  found  in  the  inscriptions 
or  in  ancient  history  relating  to  Nebuchadnezzar's  insanit}'.  On 
the  other  hand,  it  is  no  less  certain  that  the  author  of  this  chapter 
was  following  a  popular  tradition,  another  form  of  which  is  preserved 
by  Eusebius  {Praep.  Evang.  ix.  41)  from  the  Ass\'rian  history  of 
Abydenus,  who  lived  about  a.d.  200'.  'This  also  have  I  found 
concerning  Nebuchadnezzar  in  the  book  of  Abydenus  On  the 
Assyrians.  Megasthenes  (floruit  circa  300  b.c.)  relates  that  Nebu- 
chadrezzar became  mightier  than  Herakles  and  made  war  upon 
Libya  and  Iberia  ;  having  conquered  these  countries  he  trans, 
ported  some  of  their  inhabitants  to  the  eastern  shores  of  the  sea. 
Afterwards,  as  the  Chaldaean  story  goes,  when  he  had  ascended 
the  roof  of  his  palace,  he  was  inspired  by  some  god  or  other  and 

'  The  following  passage  is  taken  from  Bevan,  p.  87  sq. 


DANIEL  4.  a  39 

multiplied  unto  you.     It  hath  seemed  good  unto  me  to  2 

cried  aloud,  "  O  men  of  Babylon,  lo  I,  Nebuchadrezzar,  announce 
to  you  the  future  calamity,  which  neither  Bel  my  ancestor  nor  our 
queen,  Beltis,  can  persuade  the  Fates  to  avert.  There  shall  come 
a  Persian,  a  mule,  who  shall  have  your  own  gods  as  his  allies, 
and  he  shall  make  you  slaves.  Moreover,  he  who  shall  lielp  to 
bring  this  about  shall  be  (the  son)  of  a  Median  woman, ^  the 
boast  of  the  Assyrians.  Would  that,  before  his  countrymen 
perish,  some  whirlpool  or  flood  might  seize  him  and  destroy  him 
utterly  !  or  else  that  he  might  betake  himself  to  some  other  place, 
and  might  be  driven  through  the  desert,  where  is  no  city  nor  track 
of  men,  where  wild  beasts  seek  their  food  and  birds  fly  hither  and 
thither,  would  that  among  rocks  and  mountain  clefts  he  might 
wander  alone  !  And  as  for  me,  may  I.  before  he  imagines  this, 
meet  some  happier  end  !  "  When  he  had  thus  prophesied  he 
suddenly  vanished.' 

This  is  clearly  a  popular  legend  of  Babylonian  origin  referring 
to  the  overthrow  of  the  Babylonian  empire  by  Cyrus  '  the  mule,' 
and  the  part  borne  therein  by  the  son  of  the  Median  woman,  i.e. 
by  Nabunaid,  the  last  of  the  Babylonian  kings. 

Bevan  points  out  that  the  resemblances  between  the  narrative 
in  Daniel  and  in  Abydenus  cannot  be  accidental.  In  both  King 
Nebuchadnezzar  is  on  the  roof  of  his  palace  :  in  both  a  divine 
voice  makes  itself  heard  (in  the  former  work  to  the  king,  in  the 
latter  through  him)  :  and,  finally,  the  doom  pronounced  in  both  is 
similar  though  its  object  diflfers.  But  neither  form  of  the  story 
is  borrowed  from  the  other,  though  that  of  Abydenus  is  more 
primitive,  while  that  in  Daniel  has  been  transformed  to  serve  a 
didactic  aim. 

The  object  of  chapter  iv  is  not,  as  that  of  iii  is  in  part,  to 
admonish  the  Jews  against  idolatry,  but  to  .show  the  sheer  help- 
lessness of  the  heathen  powers  over  against  the  true  God. 
However  irresistible  the  power  of  Antiochus  might  seem  to  the 
Jews,  our  author  teaches  through  the  lips  of  the  great  King 
of  Babylon,  that  the  mightiest  monarch  who  resists  the  will  of 
God  has  no  more  power  than  the  meanest  of  mankind,  and  can  in 
one  moment  be  reduced,  not  merely  to  the  position  of  the  latter, 
but  even  to  that  of  the  brute.  The  obvious  lesson  involved  is  that 
the  Jews  are  not  to  fear  the  power  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  ;  for 
that  God  rules,  and  that  nothing  can  fall  out  but  what  He  permits. 
As  the  pride  of  Nebuchadnezzar  was  humbled,  so  would  be  that 
of  the  Syrian  king. 

iv.  1.  peace  "be  multiplied  unto  you.  Cf.  vi.25,  i  Pet.  i.  2, 
a  Pet.  i.  2.     In  Ezra  v.  7  we  have  the  formula  '  all  peace.' 

^  So  emtnded  by  Von  Gutschmidt. 


4o  DANIEL  4.  3-7 

shew  the  signs  and  wonders  that  the  Most  High  God 

3  hath  wrought  toward  me.  How  great  are  his  signs  ! 
and  how  mighty  are  his  wonders !  his  kingdom  is  an 
everlasting  kingdom,  and  his  dominion  is  from  genera- 
tion to  generation. 

4  I    Nebuchadnezzar  was  at  rest  in  mine  house,  and 

5  flourishing  in  my  palace.  I  saw  a  dream  which  made 
me  afraid ;    and  the  ^  thoughts  upon  my  bed  and  the 

6  visions  of  my  head  troubled  me.  Therefore  made  I  a 
decree  to  bring  in  all  the  wise  men  of  Babylon  before 
me,  that  they  might  make  known  unto  rne  the  inter- 

7  pretation  of  the  dream.     Then  came  in  the  magicians 

*  Or,  irnaginaiions 

2.  sig'ns  and  wonders.  Cf.  Deut.  iv.  34,  Isa.  viii.  18  ;  arj/iua 
Kai  Tfpara  in  the  N.T.  as  in  Mark  xiii.  22,   Rom.  xv.  19. 

Most  High  God.     See  iii.  26. 

3.  This  verse  is  a  stanza  of  four  lines — 

How  great  are  his  signs  ! 

And  how  mighty  are  his  wonders  !  &c. 

his  kingdom  .  .  .  generation.     A  variant  of  the  doxology  in 
Ps.  cxlv.  13.     Cf.  vii.  14^*,  18''. 

4-9.  The  king's  alarm  over  his  dream  which  none  of  the  wise 
men  could  interpret.  The  LXX  omits  6-9.  See  Introd.  to 
chapter  above. 

4.  flourishing.  This  word,  which  is  properly  used  of  a  tree, 
was  possibly  suggested  by  Ps.  xcii.  13,  14,  where,  as  here,  it  is 
used  figuratively  of  persons.  It  is  used  indifferently  of  the 
prosperity  of  the  righteous,  Ps.  Iii.  8,  or  of  the  wicked,  Ps. 
xxxvii.  35. 

5.  thoughts.  The  word  harhorittf  thoughts  '  or  'imaginations,' 
is  found  here  only  in  the  O.T.  In  the  Targums  and  the  Talmud 
it  is  used  specially  of  evil  thoughts. 

visions  of  my  head.     Cf.  ii.  28. 

troubled.      Rather   *  alarmed.'      This  word   is   of   frequent 
occurrence  in  our  text. 

6.  Here,  as  in  ii.  2,  the  wise  men  are  summoned. 

7.  On  these  classes  see  note  on  ii.  2.  In  6-7  the  same  ideas  as 
in  ii.  2  are  repeated  with  a  modification.  The  king  here  tells  his 
dream :  cf.  verses  10,  13. 


DANIEL  4.  8,  9  41 

the  enchanters,  the  Chaldeans,  and  the  soothsayers : 
and  I  told  the  dream  before  them ;  but  they  did  not 
make  known  unto  me  the  interpretation  thereof.  But  8 
at  the  last  Daniel  came  in  before  me,  whose  name  was 
Belteshazzar,  according  to  the  name  of  my  god,  and  in 
whom  is  the  spirit  of  the  holy  gods:  and  I  told  the 
dream  before  him,  sayings  O  Belteshazzar,  master  of  the  9 
magicians,  because  I  know  that  the  spirit  of  the  holy 
gods  is  in  thee,  and  no  secret  troubleth  thee,  tell  me 
the  visions  of  my  dream  that  I  have  seen,  and  the  inter- 


8.  But  at  the  last.  This  rendering  is  very  doubtful,  but  so  is 
the  text,  though  Marti  accepts  it.  Theod.  and  the  Syriac  simply 
give  '  until.'  Michaelis  and  Bevan  change  the  point  and  render 
'  and  yet  another,'     Behrmann  :  'and  (so  it  was)  till  another.' 

the  name  of  my  god  :  i.e.  Bel.     See  note  on  i.  7. 

in  whom  is  the  spirit,  &c.  Imitated  from  Gen.  xli.,  38 
'a  man  in  whom  the  spirit  of  God  is.'     Cf.  verses  9,  18,  v.  14. 

the  holy  gfods.  The  king  speaks  as  an  idolater.  Contrast 
Joshua  xxiv.  19.  This  expression  was  probably  in  common  use  in 
Syria  since  it  occurs  in  the  inscription  of  Eshmunazar,  king  of 
Sidon  of  the  third  or  fourth  cent.  B.C. 

and  I  told  the  dream  before  him.  It  is  not  improbable  that 
the  word  'dream'  is  here  an  intrusion,  seeing  that  it  is  omitted  by 
Theod.  (all  MSS.  excepting  A).  In  that  case  we  should  render 
*  and  I  said  before  him  '  This  reading  would  remove  the  glaring 
inconsistency  that  otherwise  arises  between  this  verse  and  the 
next,  where  the  king  requires  Daniel  to  tell  him  the  dream,  which, 
according  to  the  present  Massoretic  text,  the  king  has  just  told 
Daniel.  By  so  reading  we  are  relieved  from  the  necessity  of 
supplying  '  saying,'  as  in  the  R.V. 

9.  master  of  the  maeficians.     Cf.  ii.  48. 

no  secret  troubleth  thee.     Cf.  Ezek.  xxviii.  3. 

tell  me  the  visions  of  my  dream  .  . «  and  the  interpreta- 
tion thereof.  This  is  a  peculiar  statement  seeing  that  the  king 
himself  tells  his  dream  in  the  next  verse.  Theod.  inserts  aKovaov 
before  the  first  clause  ;  then  we  have  :  'Hear  then  the  visions,  &c. 
and  tell  me  its  interpretation.'  Behrmann  takes  the  expression  as 
a  hendiadys,  i.e.  'the  interpretation  of  my  dream  visions,'  while 
Giesebrecht,  by  an  emendation  of  the  word  for  visions,  arrives  at 
the  following  rendering  :  '  I  will  recount  my  dream  and  do  thou 
tell  me  its  interpretation.' 


42  DANIEL  4.  10-13 

10  pretation  thereof.  Thus  were  the  visions  of  my  head 
upon  my  bed:    I  saw,  and  behold  a  tree  in  the  midst 

11  of  the  earth,  and  the  height  thereof  was  great.  The 
tree  grew,  and  was  strong,  and  the  height  thereof  reached 
unto  heaven,  and  the  sight  thereof  to  the  end  of  all  the 

12  earth.  The  leaves  thereof  were  fair,  and  the  fruit  thereof 
much,  and  in  it  was  meat  for  all  :  the  beasts  of  the  field 
had  shadow  under  it,  and  the  fowls  of  the  heaven  dwelt 

13  in  the  branches  thereof,  and  all  flesh  was  fed  of  it.  I  saw 
in  the  visions  of  my  head  upon  my  bed,  and,  behold, 

10-17.  In  this  dream  of  the  king  the  imagery  is  clearly  borrowed 
to  a  considerable  extent  from  Ezek.  xxxi.  3-14,  where  the  glory 
of  the  Assyrian  is  h'kened  to  that  of  a  cedar  in  Lebanon,  in  the 
boughs  of  which  all  the  fowls  of  heaven  made  their  nests  and 
under  the  branches  of  which  all  the  beasts  of  the  field  brought 
forth  their  young,  and  under  the  shadow  of  which  dwelt  all  great 
nations.  This  great  tree,  like  that  in  the  king's  vision,  was 
suddenly  destroyed.  Behrmann  and  Driver  compare  the  dream 
of  Xerxes  recorded  in  Herod,  vii.  19,  in  which  he  saw  himself 
crowned  with  a  shoot  of  an  olive  tree,  the  boughs  of  which  cover 
the  whole  earth. 

lO^-lQ.  These  verses  form,  as  Marti  has  recognized,  two 
strophes  of  four  lines  each.  But  two  dittographs  call  for  excision, 
which  become  obvious  on  the  arrangement  of  the  passage  in  verse  : 

'  I  saw,  and  behold  a  tree  in  the  midst  of  the  earth, 
[And  the  height  thereof  was  great]  : 
The  tree  was  grown  and  had  become  strong, 
And  the  height  thereof  reached  unto  heaven, 
And  the  sight  thereof  to  the  end  of  all  the  earth. 

The  leaves  thereof  were  fair  and  the  fruit  thereof  much, 

[And  in  it  was  meat  for  all] 
The  beasts  of  the  field  had  shadow  under  it. 
And  the  fowls  of  heaven  dwelt  in  the  branches  thereof, 
And  all  flesh  was  fed  by  it.' 

Here  line  2  of  the  first  stanza  is  a  dittograph  of  line  4,  and  line  a 
of  the  second  stanza  is  a  dittograph  of  line  5,  borrowed  from  ver.  21. 
But  it  is  just  as  possible  that  this  line  is  original  in  both  these 
verses,  and  that  line  5  in  ver.  12  is  an  intrusion. 

12.  the  beasts  of  the  field  .  .  .  the  fowls.     Cf.  Ezek.  xxxi.  6. 


DANIEL  4.  14-17  43 

a  watcher  and  an  holy  one  came  down  from  heaven. 
He  cried  aloud,  and  said  thus,  Hew  down  the  tree,  and  14 
cut  off  his  branches,  shake  off  his  leaves,  and  scatter  his 
fruit :   let  the  beasts   get  away  from  under  it,  and  the 
fowls  from  his  branches.     Nevertheless  leave  the  stump  15 
of  his  roots  in  the  earth,  even  with  a  band  of  iron  and 
brass,  in  the  tender  grass  of  the  field ;  and  let  it  be  wet 
with  the  dew  of  heaven,  and  let  his  portion  be  with  the 
beasts  in  the  grass  of  the  earth  :  let  his  heart  be  changed  16 
from  man's,  and  let  a  beast's  heart  be  given  unto  him ; 
and  let  seven  times  pass  over  him.     The  sentence  is  by  17 
the  decree  of  the  watchers,  and  the  ^  demand  by  the  word 

*  Or,  tnaiter 

13.  a  watcher.  Cf.  17,  23.  This  word  'ir  is  rendered  €7^17- 
7o/)osinTheod.  The  term  is  of  frequent  occurrence  in  i  Enoch,  where 
it  designates  two  classes  i"  the  archangels  :  2°  the  fallen  angels. 
See  I  Enoch  i.  5,  note,  Jubilees  iv.  22,  viii.  3.  x.  5,  2  Enoch  xviii.  i. 
It  is  used  in  the  sense  of  *  angel '  also  in  S3'riac. 

This  term  recalls  the  word  shonicrim,  '  watchmen,'  used  in 
Isa.  Ixii.  6.  These  'watchmen '  are  not  prophets,  but  heavenly 
beings  commissioned  by  God  to  put  Him  in  remembrance  of  the 
walls  of  Zion. 

an  holy  one.  This  designation  denoting  an  angel—  cf.  viii.  13, 
Job  V.  I,  XV.  15,  Ps.  Ixxxix.  5,  7,  Zech.  xiv.  5 — is  very  frequent  in 
I  Enoch,  where  see  note  on  i.  9. 

14.  The  words  of  the  watcher  form  a  stanza  of  four  lines. 

15.  The  hope  of  a  restoration  is  indicated  through  the  stump 
being  left  in  the  ground.  It  is  secured  by  a  band  of  iron  and  brass 
to  prevent  its  removal  (Marti). 

This  verse  likewise  forms  a  stanza  of  four  lines.  In  it  the 
change  is  made  from  the  symbol  to  the  thing  symbolized. 

16-17.  These  two  verses  form  three  stanzas  of  three  lines  each. 

16.  This  verse  is  to  be  understood  of  the  king  only.  The 
heart  here  denotes,  of  course,  '  the  intellect.'  Cf.  ii.  28'',  note. 
A  *  heartless '  man,  according  to  the  Hebrews,  was  a  foolish  man, 
Cf.  Jer.  V.  21. 

seven  times :  i.  e.  seven  years  as  in  LXX  and  Joseph.  Ant. 
X.  ID.  6.     Cf  vii.  25,  xii.  7,  Rev.  xii.  14. 

17.  the  decree  of  the  watchers.  In  ver.  24  it  is  said  to  be 
•the  decree  of  the  Most  High.'     In  the   O.T.   the  angels  form 

G 


44  DANIEL  4.  iR-20 

of  the  holy  ones :  to  the  intent  that  the  living  may  know 
that  the  Most  High  ruleth  in  the  kingdom  of  men,  and 
giveth  it  to  whomsoever  he  will,  and  setteth  up  over 

18  it  the  lowest  of  men.  This  dream  I  king  Nebuchad- 
nezzar have  seen  :  and  thou,  O  Belteshazzar,  declare 
the  interpretation,  forasmuch  as  all  the  wise  men  of  my 
kingdom  are  not  able  to  make  known  unto  me  the 
interpretation;  but  thou  art  able,  for  the  spirit  of  the  holy 
gods  is  in  thee. 

19  Then  Daniel,  whose  name  was  Belteshazzar,  was 
astonied  for  a  while,  and  his  thoughts  troubled  him. 
The  king  answered  and  said,  Belteshazzar,  let  not  the 
dream,  or  the  interpretation,  trouble  thee.  Belteshazzar 
answered  and  said,  My  lord,  the  dream  be  to  them  that 
hate  thee,  and  the  interpretation  thereof  to  thine  adver- 

20  saries.     The  tree  that  thou  sawest,  which  grew,  and  was 

a  kind  of  heavenly  council  (cf.  Ps.  Ixxxix.  5,  7,  Job  i.  6,  12, 
ii.  I,  6).  This  idea  was  carried  in  later  Judaism  to  extravagant 
and  even  blasphemous  lengths,  which  not  only  represents  God  as 
doing  nothing  without  consulting  this  council  (so  Sanh.  38**, 
quoting  this  passage  of  Daniel),  but  also  states  that,  when  God 
intended  to  make  Hezekiah  the  Messiah,  this  council  successfully 
opposed  His  intention  (Sanh.  94*'.  In  Sanh.  qS**  it  is  said 
that,  when  God  wished  to  admit  the  descendants  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar into  the  Jewish  Community,  the  angels  of  service  would 
not  suffer  it. 

the  demand  by  the  word  of  the  holy  ones.     Rather 'the 
word  of  the  holy  ones  is  the  matter  in  question.' 

18.  the  spirit,  &c.     Cf.  ver.  8. 

19.  for  a  while.  The  Aram,  k^sha'a  stands  in  Onkelos,  Num. 
xvi.  21,  for  k^rega'  :  cf.  also  Exod.  xxxiii.  5  (^Onk.\  It  may 
mean,  therefore,  '  for  a  moment.'  In  later  times  it  came  to  mean 
an  hour. 

The   king*    answered  .  .  .  trouble    thee.       This    clause   is 
omitted  by  the  LXX  and  Theod. 

to    thine    adversaries.     Cf   Ovid,  Fasti  iii.   494    *  hostibus 
eveniat.' 

20-21.  Repeated  with  remarkable  effect  from  11 -12.  The 
verse  form  is  here  preserved. 


DANIEL  4.  21-27  45 

strong,  whose  height  reached  unto  the  heaven,  and  the 
sight  thereof  to  all  the  earth  ;  whose  leaves  were  fair,  and  21 
the  fruit  thereof  much,  and  in  it  was  meat  for  all ;  under 
which  the  beasts   of  the  field  dwelt,   and  upon  whose 
branches  the  fowls  of  the  heaven  had  their  habitation : 
it  is  thou,  O  king,  that  art  grown  and  become  strong :  22 
for  thy  greatness  is  grown,  and  reacheth  unto  heaven, 
and  thy  dominion  to  the  end  of  the  earth.    And  whereas  23 
the  king  saw  a  watcher  and  an  holy  one  coming  down 
from  heaven,  and  saying.  Hew  down  the  tree,  and  destroy 
it ;  nevertheless  leave  the  stump  of  the  roots  thereof  in 
the  earth,  even  with  a  band  of  iron  and  brass,  in  the 
tender  grass  of  the  field ;  and  let  it  be  wet  with  the  dew 
of  heaven,  and  let  his  portion  be  with  the  beasts  of  the 
field,  till  seven  times  pass  over  him ;  this  is  the  inter-  24 
pretation,  O  king,  and  it  is  the  decree  of  the  Most  High, 
which  is  come  upon  my  lord  the  king  :  that  thou  shalt  be  25 
driven   from  men,   and  thy  dwelling  shall  be  with  the 
beasts  of  the  field,  and  thou  shalt  be  made  to  eat  grass 
as  oxen,  and  shalt  be  wet  with  the  dew  of  heaven,  and 
seven  times  shall  pass  over  thee ;  till  thou  know  that  the 
Most  High  ruleth  in  the  kingdom  of  men,  and  giveth  it 
to  whomsoever  he  will.     And  whereas  they  commanded  -^6 
to  leave  the  stump  of  the  tree  roots ;  thy  kingdom  shall 
be  sure  unto  thee,  after  that  thou  shalt  have  known  that 
the  heavens  do  rule.     Wherefore,  O  king,  let  my  counsel  27 

23.  Cf.  13-16. 

26.  And  whereas  they  commanded  to  leave.  Better  with 
the  LXX  and  Theod.  read  'and  whereas  they  commanded  (or 
"it  was  commanded")  :  Leave.'  The  analogy  of  ver.  23  where 
tlie  direct  command  is  preserved,  supports  this  restoration  of  the 
text. 

the  heavens.  This  term  here  designates  1°.  the  inhabitants 
of  the  heavens,  i.  e.  the  watchers  who  had  shared  in  the  decree 
(yer.  17,  so  Behrmann  and  Marti^,  or  20.  it  is  with  Bevan  and 

G2 


46  DANIEL  4.  38-30 

be  acceptable  unto  thee,  and  «•  break  off  thy  sins  by  right- 
eousness, and  thine  iniquities  by  shewing  mercy  to  the 
poor ;  if  there  may  be  ^  a  lengthening  of  thy  tranquillity. 
All  this  came  upon  the  king  Nebuchadnezzar.  At  the 
end  of  twelve  months  he  was  walking  c  in  the  royal  palace 
of  Babylon.  The  king  spake  and  said,  Is  not  this  great 
Babylon,  which  I  have  built  for  the  royal  dwelling  place, 
by  the  might  of  my  power  and  for  the   glory  of  my 

*  Or,  redeem  ^  Or,  as  otherwise  read,  an  healing  of  thine  error 
'^  Aram.  upon. 

Driver  to  be  taken  as  an  expression  of  reverence  for  God — 
a  meaning  which  is  not  elsewhere  found  in  the  O.T.  In  this 
sense  it  is  found  in  i  Mace.  iii.  18,  19,  iv.  10,  &c.,  and  in  the 
Pirke  Aboth  iv.  7,  17. 

27.  The  dream  is  a  prediction,  but  the  threatened  evil  can  be 
surmounted  by  repentance. 

27.  break  off,  or  '  redeem,'  as  in  margin  R.V.  This  meaning 
is  found  in  the  kindred  root  paraJc  in  Hebrew  in  Ps.  cxxxvi.  24, 
Lam.  v.  8.  The  counsel  here  tendered  agrees  with  the  Jewish 
teaching  in  Sir.  iii.  30,  31,  Tob.  iv.  7-11,  and  the  Pirke  Aboth 
iv.  15  *  He  who  performs  one  precept  has  gotten  to  himself  an 
advocate  and  he  who  commits  one  transgression  has  gotten  to 
himself  one  accuser.'  Rabbi  Aqiba  said  (Baba  Bathra  10^)  that 
God  left  the  feeding  of  the  poor  to  the  faithful  in  order  that  the 
latter  might  be  saved  from  the  judgement  of  hell  thereby.  The 
teaching  of  the  Pirke  Aboth  was  repeated  by  R.  Eleazar  b.  Jose — 
a  pupil  of  Rabbi  Aqiba  (Baba  Bathra  10*). 

rig'hteoiisness.  This  expression  denotes  here  'good  works,' 
and  at  this  date  almsgiving  was  the  chief  of  these.  Even  SiKaioavvTj 
came  to  mean  '  almsgiving,'  as  we  see  from  Matt.  vi.  i,  where  the 
true  text  is  'righteousness,'  and  'alms,'  the  right  interpretation, 
has  made  its  way  into  a  great  number  of  the  later  MSS.  As  the 
chief  Hebrew  virtue,  '  righteousness,'  was  in  the  course  of  time 
degraded  into  the  mere  act  of  almsgiving,  so  the  chief  Christian 
grace,  namely  djairTjj  caritas,  '  charity,'  incurred  the  same  fate. 

a  lengrthening*  of  thy  tranquillity.  By  a  slightly  different 
punctuation  of  the  two  words  in  the  text,  Ewald  arrived  at  the 
following  rendering  which  is  that  ot  the  margin  in  the  R.V.,  'an 
healing  of  thy  error.' 

28-33.  The  fulfilment  of  the  dreams. 

30.  the  royal  dwelling  place.  Rather  'a  royal  dwelline: 
place,* 


DANIEL  4.31-35  47 

majesty  ?    ^Vhile  the  word  was  in  the  king's  mouth,  there  3» 
fell  a  voice  from  heaven,  sayings  O  king  Nebuchadnezzar, 
to  thee  it  is  spoken  :  the  kingdom  is  departed  from  thee. 
And  thou  shalt  be  driven  from  men,  and  thy  dwelling  32 
shall  be  with  the  beasts  of  the  field  ;  thou  shalt  be  made 
to  eat  grass  as  oxen,  and  seven  times  shall  pass  over  thee; 
until  thou  know  that  the  Most  High  ruleth  in  the  king- 
dom of  men,  and  giveth  it  to  whomsoever  he  will.     The  33 
same  hour  was  the  thing  fulfilled  upon  Nebuchadnezzar : 
and  he  was  driven  from  men,  and  did  eat  grass  as  oxen, 
and  his  body  was  wet  with  the  dew  of  heaven,,  till  his  hair 
was  grown  like  edi^QS^  feathers,  and  his  nails  like  birds' 
claws.     And  at  the  end  of  the  days  I  Nebuchadnezzar  34 
lifted  up  mine  eyes  unto  heaven,  and  mine  understanding 
returned  unto  me,  and  I  blessed  the  Most  High,  and 
I  praised  and  honoured  him  that  liveth  for  ever ;  for  his 
dominion  is  an  everlasting  dominion,  and  his  kingdom 
from  generation  to  generation  :  and  all  the  inhabitants  35 
of  the  earth  are  reputed  as  nothing  :  and  he  doeth  accord- 
ing to  his  will  in  the  army  of  heaven,  and  among  the 

31.  fell  a  voice  from  heaven.  This  voice,  called  by  the  later 
Jews  a  Bath-kol  'daughter  of  a  voice,'  is  referred  to  in  the  Test. 
Levi  xviii.  6  (see  note).  Test.  Jud.  xxiv.  2,  Matt.  iii.  17,  Mark  i.  11, 
Luke  iii.  22.  In  the  case  of  the  Bath-kol  a  voice  was  heard  but 
nothing  seen.  See  Weber,  y»fl^.  Tlieol.,  194  sq.,  Jew.  Encyc.^  ii. 
588-592. 

34.  the  days,  i.e.  the  seven  'times'  of  verses  16,  23,  25.  32, 
lifted  up  imne  eyes  unto  heaven.   Bevan  draws  attention  to 

the  interesting  parallel  in  the  Bacc/iae  of  Euripides  (1265  sqq.), 
where  Agave  in  her  madness  looks  up  to  heaven  and  has  her 
reason  restored.     See  also  Susanna,  ver.  9. 

him  that  liveth  for  ever.   Cf.  xii.  7,  Sir.  xviii,  i,  i  Enoch  v.  i 

his  kingdom,  &c.     Cf.  ver.  3. 

35.  This  verse  forms  a  stanza  of  four  lines. 

are  reputed  as   nothing.     Rather   '  are  as  persons  of   no 
account'  (Bevan). 

the  army  of  heaven.     This  is  the  Aramaic  equivalent  of  the 


4S  DANIEL  4.  36,  37—5.  i 

inhabitants  of  the  earth  :  and  none  can  ^  stay  his  hand, 

36  or  say  unto  him,  What  doest  thou  ?  At  the  same  time 
mine  understanding  returned  unto  me  ;  and  for  the  glory 
of  my  kingdom,  my  majesty  and  brightness  returned  unto 
me ;  and  my  counsellors  and  my  lords  sought  unto  me ; 
and   I   was   established  in   my   kingdom,  and  excellent 

37  greatness  was  added  unto  me.  Now  I  Nebuchadnezzar 
praise  and  extol  and  honour  the  King  of  heaven  ;  for  all 
his  works  are  truth,  and  his  ways  judgement :  and  those 
that  walk  in  pride  he  is  able  to  abase. 

5      Belshazzar  the  king  made  a  great  feast  to  a  thousand 

*  Aram.  sU-ike. 


Hebrew  '  host  of  heaven ' — a  phrase  which  embraces  all  the 
superhuman  powers  and  is  used  sometimes  of  the  angels  and 
sometimes  of  the  stars. 

stay  his  hand,  lit.  'strike  his  hand.'  This  expression  is 
found  in  tlie  Targ.  of  Eccles.  viii.  4'',  and  in  the  Mishna  and  later 
Jewish  literature. 

What  doest  thou  ?     Cf.  Isa.  xlv.  9. 

36.  mine  understanding  returned  unto  me.  This  claus? 
seems  an  intrusion;  for  it  has  already  occurred  two  verses  earlier, 
where  it  is  said:  'Mine  understanding  returned  unto  me  and  I 
blessed,  &c.'  There  it  comes  in  rightly.  By  the  recovery  of  his 
reason  the  king  is  enabled  and  desirous  to  praise  God,  and  thus 
he  does  in  verses  34-35.  On  this  confession  follows  his  restora- 
tion to  his  kingdom.     Hence  it  seems  best  to  omit  it  here. 

majesty.  The  corresponding  Hebrew  word  is  used  of  the 
majesty  of  God  or  of  a  king. 

counsellors.     See  iii.  24,  27. 

37.  This  verse  sums  up  the  teaching  of  the  entire  chapter. 

V.     The  Historical  Difficulties  of  this  Chapter. 

This  chapter  deals  with  events  about  which  two  very  different 
accounts  are  given.  The  first  and  trustworthy  account  (i°)  is 
to  be  found  in  the  inscriptions  and  comes  probably  from  the  hand 
of  a  contemporary  historian  or  annalist :  the  second  (2")  is  that 
which  is  recorded  by  Herodotus  and  Xenophon,  with  which  in 
some  of  its  most  salient  features  the  story  in  our  text  agrees. 

1°.  The  main  facts  recorded  in  the  inscriptions  can  be  given  in 
a  few  words.     Cyrus,  who  became  king  of  Anshan   in  549  and 


DANIEL  5.  I  49 

of   his    lords,    and   drank    wine    before   the    thousand. 

was  called  '  king  of  Persia '  in  546  or  earlier,  in  the  year  538 
attacked  Babj'lon.  He  overthrew  the  army  of  Nabuna'id  at  Opis 
(Babylonian  Upe)  on  the  Tigris  in  Tishri  (  —  October)^,  captured 
Sippar  on  the  Euphrates  on  Tishri  14,  and  on  the  i6th  his  general 
Gubaru  entered  Babylon  without  striking  a  blow,  and  took  Nabu- 
na'id 2  prisoner.  On  Marchesvan  3  (=  Oct.  27  Cyrus  made  his 
entry  into  Babylon,  and  on  the  nth  (-Nov.  4)  Gubaru  slew  the 
king's  son  in  a  night  assault. 

Further,  in  inscriptions  of  the  first  twelve  years  of  Nabuna'id's 
reign  Belsarusur  ( = '  Bel  protect  the  king'),  'the  king's  son,'  is 
several  times  mentioned.  Later  only  the  king's  son  is  mentioned 
without  the  proper  name.  AVhether  the  king's  son  mentioned  in 
the  later  years  is  Belsarusur  [i.  e.  Belshazzar  of  our  author)  is  not 
quite  certain. 

2".  Herodotus  (i.  188  :  cf.  i.  74,  77),  who  names  the  last  king 
Labynetus  (Aa/3i;i'77Toj  =  Nabuna'id),  appears  to  have  regarded  him 
as  the  son  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (see  KAT.,p,  288).  He  represents 
(I.  191)  Cyrus  as  diverting  the  waters  of  the  Euphrates  and  enter- 
ing Babylon  by  the  river  bed,  while  the  inhabitants  were  cele- 
brating a  festival.  In  Xenophon's  Cyropaedia  (vii.  15-31)  a 
similar  account  is  given,  though  here  the  city  is  surprised  by 
Gobryas  and  Gadates. 

Now  if  we  compare  the  account  in  our  text  with  i''  and  2"  it  is 
clear  at  a  glance  that  it  agrees  most  with  2".  With  i"  it  has 
practically  nothing  in  common  but  the  name  Belshazzar 2.  For 
while  our  text  represents  Belshazzar  as  the  son  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
and  actual  king,  for  several  years,  of  Babylon,  the  inscriptions 
make  him  to  be  the   son   of   Nabuna'id  *  and  never   to  be  king. 

*  So  with  Meyer,  ZATW.,  1S9S,  p.  340sq.,\ve  must  read  for  July, 
since  September  has  already  been  reached  two  lines  earlier. 

'^  According  to  Berosus  TJoseph.  c.  Apion.  i.  20),  whose  account 
agrees  more  with  the  inscriptions  than  with  Herodotus. 

^  Observe  the  contrasting  statements.  In  the  inscriptions  Bel- 
shazzar is  only  the  king's  son,  making  a  desperate  resistance  in  some 
fastness  of  the  city,  after  the  city  as  a  whole  had  been  surrendered 
and  Nabuna'id  taken  prisoner.  In  a  night  attack  shortly  after  Cyrus's 
arrival  this  fastness  was  stormed  and  Belshazzar  slain.  But  in  our 
text  Nabuna'id  is  not  mentioned  and  Belshazzar  is  king.  There  is 
nothing  to  suggest  that  the  greater  part  of  the  city  is  in  the  jiands  of 
the  enemy.  On  the  contrary  Belshazzar  makes  a  great  feast,  sum- 
mons to  it  a  thousand  of  his  lords,  calls  for  the  services  of  the 
enchanters,  the  Chaldeans,  and  the  soothsayers,  and  institutes  Daniel 
as  a  ruler  of  one-third  of  the  kingdom. 

*  Nabuna'id  was  no  relation  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  according  to  the 


50  DANIEL  5.  a 

2  Belshazzar,  whiles  he  tasted  the  wine,   commanded  to 


Further,  whereas  our  text  represents  Babylon  as  being  captured 
by  force,  the  inscriptions  state  that  it  was  surrendered  peaceably 
to  the  general  of  Cyrus. 

On  the  other  hand  our  text  agrees  with  the  tradition  recorded 
both  in  Herodotus  and  Xenophon  that  Babylon  was  taken  in  the 
night,  zvhile  the  inhabitants  were  celebrating  a/east'^.  Further,  if  as 
it  appears,  Herodotus  believed  Labynetus  (i.e.  Nabuna'id)  to  have 
been  a  son  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  we  have  here  an  approximation 
to  the  statement  in  our  text  that  Belshazzar  was  the  son  of 
Nebuchadnezzar. 

It  is  strange  that  the  author  of  our  text  should  have  represented 
Belshazzar  (in  v.  2)  as  the  son  of  Nebuchadnezzar ''',  seeing  that 
in  a  Kings  xxv.  27,  Jer.  Hi.  31  the  actual  son  and  successor  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  i.  e.  Evilmerodach  ,  =  Amel  Marduk  in  the  in- 
scriptions   is  mentioned. 

The  Purpose.  From  the  above  brief  statement  it  follows  that 
our  author  accepted  the  current  popular  account  of  the  fall  of 
Bab3'lon,  not  concerning  himself  with  its  historicity,  and  recast 
it  to  suit  his  own  didactic  purpose.  These  materials  which 
referred  to  a  king  or  prince  of  Babylon  our  author  has  used  with 
a  view  to  the  present  crisis.  If  Belshazzar  was  overthrown,  in 
part  at  all  events,  for  his  profanation  of  the  vessels  brought  to 
Bab3'lon  from  the  Temple,  what  would  befall  the  king  who  (like 
Antiochus  Epiphanes)  offered  heathen  sacrifices  on  the  very  altar 
of  God  in  the  Temple  ? 

1-4.  Belshazzar'' s  feast ,  and  his  profanation  of  the  Temple  vessels. 

1.  Belshazzar:  i.e.  Bel-sar-nsiir,  'Bel  protect  the  king.'  Cf. 
Nergal-sharezer  (Jer.  xxxix.  3,  i.e.  Nergal-Sar-usur,  •  Nergal 
protect  the  king!'  In  the  LXX  and  Theod.  this  name  and 
Belteshazzar  (i.  7)  are  represented  by  one  and  the  same  word 
BaXraadp. 

the  king.      In   none    of  the    inscriptions   does    Belshazzar 
appear  as  king  but  only  as  the  king's  son,  though  it  is  a  matter  of 

statement  of  Abydenus  in  Eus.  Praep.  Ev.  ix.  41.  3  npoarjKovTaoi 
ovSev).  In  a  Babylonian  inscription  he  states  his  position  thus: 
'  Nabuna'id,  king  of  Babylon,  the  chosen  of  Nebo  and  Marduk,  the 
son  of  Nabu-balatsu-ikbi,  the  wise  prince  am  1.' 

^  This  idea  in  the  popular  account  may  have  arisen  from  a  miscon- 
ception of  the  joy  with  which  the  Babylonians  received  Cyrus,  as 
Marti  suggests.. 

^  In  Joseph  {Ant.  x.  11.  2)  Baltasar  is  represented  as  succeeding 
Labosordachus  (i.e.  Labashi  Marduk,  son  of  Nergal-§ar-usur''i  and 
identified  with  Nabuna^id. 


DANIEL  5.  3,  4  51 

bring  the  golden  and  silver  vessels  which  Nebuchadnezzar 
his  father  had  taken  out  of  the  temple  which  was  in 
Jerusalem  ;  that  the  king  and  his  lords,  his  wives  and  his 
concubines,  might  drink  therein.  Then  they  brought  3 
the  golden  vessels  that  were  taken  out  of  the  temple  of 
the  house  of  God  which  was  at  Jerusalem ;  and  the  king 
and  his  lords,  his  wives  and  his  concubines,  drank  in 
them.  They  drank  wine,  and  praised  the  gods  of  gold,  4 
and  of  silver,  of  brass,  of  iron,  of  wood,  and  of  stone. 

inference  and  not  of  demonstration  that  in  the  inscriptions  the 
king's  son  who  was  slain  after  the  taking  of  Babylon  was  Bel- 
shazzar. 

drank  wine  before.  It  was  usual  for  oriental  kings  to  feast 
either  alone  or  with  a  few  persons  (Athenaeus  iv.  145).  Hence 
the  present  feast  seems  to  have  been  against  the  etiquette  of  the 
time.  On  tlie  other  hand  the  Babylonians  according  to  Curtius 
(v.  i)  had  a  reputation  for  debauchery.  See  also  note  on  next 
verse. 

2.  golden  and  silver  vessels.     See  i.  2  note. 

his  father.  If  we  compare  this  statement  with  its  reitera- 
tion in  II,  13,  22  we  cannot  escape  inferring  that  our  author  took 
Bclshazzar  to  be  a  son  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  Of  course  there  is 
just  the  possibility  that  Nabuna'id — Belshazzar's  father — married  a 
daughterof  Nebuchadnezzar  with  a  view  to  strengthen  his  position. 
In  that  case  Belshazzar  would  have  been  a  grandson  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, and,  as  we  know  from  O.  T.  usage,  the  word  '  father ' 
could  be  used  in  the  sense  of  grandfather  (Gen.  xxviii.  13,  xxxii. 
9),  or  great-grandfather  (i  Kings  xv.  ir,  Num.  xviii.  1,2).  But  if 
Nabuna'id  did  marry  a  daughter  of  Nebuchadnezzar  we  should 
liave  expected  some  reference  to  this  alliance  in  the  inscriptions. 
See  Introd.  to  this  chapter,  note*. 

his  wives  and  his  concubines.  Cf.  Cant.  vi.  8.  According 
to  Herod,  v.  18,  it  was  the  custom  for  women  to  appear  at  feasts 
among  the  Persians.  Cf.  also  Xenophon,  Cyr.  v.  ii.  28,  Curtius 
V.  I,  38. 

3.  the  g-olden  vessels.  Read  *  the  golden  and  the  silver 
vessels,'  with  Theod.  and  the  Peshitto.     Cf.  ver.  2. 

4.  After  the  words  '  they  .  .  .  praised  the  gods  of  gold,  and  of 
silver  .  .  .  and  of  stone,'  the  LXX  adds  '  but  the  eternal  God  they 
praised  not  who  hath  power  over  their  spirit.'  The  contrast 
between  the  idols  made  with  hands  and  the  eternal  God  from 
whom  all  life  comes  is  full  of  force,  and  probably  original,  and  the 


52  DANIEL  5.  5-7 

5  In  the  same  hour  came  forth  the  fingers  of  a  man's  hand, 
and  wrote  over  against  the  candlestick  upon  the  plaister 
of  the  wall  of  the  king's  palace :  and  the  king  saw  the 

6  part  of  the  hand  that  wrote.  Then  the  king's  "■  counte- 
nance was  changed  in  him,  and  his  thoughts  troubled 
him ;  and  the  joints  of  his  loins  were  loosed,  and  his 

7  knees  smote  one  against  another.     The  king  cried  aloud 

*  Aram,  brightness. 

internal  evidence  and  that  of  the  I. XX  is  confirmed  by  the  fact 
that  the  two  statements  are  found  together  in  ver.  23  in  the 
Massoretic  and  all  the  Versions. 

5-12.  The  marvellous  writing  on  the  wall,  and  the  alarm  of  the 
king  and  his  guests. 

5.  part  of  the  hand.  Rather  'palm  of  the  hand.'  The  text 
seems,  as  Bevan  points  out,  to  imply  that  the  hand  appeared  above 
the  couch  where  the  king  was  reclining. 

6.  was  changed  in  him.  Both  the  text  and  the  translation  are 
wrong.  For  shenohi  read  sheno  'dlohi  or  shanain  'diohi,  with  Bevan. 
The  sense  will  be  the  same  in  either  case  :  '  his  countenance  was 
changed  for  him,'  or  ^upon  him.'  We  have  then  the  same  idiom 
that  is  found  in  vi.  18.  In  fact  it  is  not  necessary  to  translate  the 
prepositional  phrase  in  English. 

loins.  The  loins  were  the  seat  of  strength  :  of.  Deut.  xxxiii. 
ri,  Ps.  Ixix.  23. 

7-8.  There  is  something  wrong  about  the  text  here.  As  it 
stands  the  wise  men  appear  twice  on  no  intelligible  grounds 
before  the  king.  Thus  in  ver.  7  the  king  addresses  them  as 
already  present,  and  tells  them  the  gifts  that  he  would  give  to  the 
successful  interpreter  of  the  mysterious  writing.  But  ver.  8 
begins  as  though  no  such  event  had  taken  place,  and  reads  '  Then 
came  in  all  the  king's  wise  men.'  In  the  LXX  this  awkwardness 
is  avoided.  According  to  it  the  king  first  of  all  summoned  the  wise 
men  to  interpret  the  writing.  These  came  in  in  due  course,  but 
were  unable  to  interpret  the  writing  Then  the  king  issued  a 
proclamation  setting  forth  the  rewards  that  would  be  conferred  on 
the  man,  whoever  he  might  be,  who  made  known  the  writing  to 
the  king.  The  wise  men  are  not  summoned  ;  for  the  invitation  is 
now  general.  The  wise  men  again  enter  to  try  their  skill,  but 
again  fail. 

It  is  obvious  that  we  have  here  in  the  LXX  a  rational  order  of 
events.  It  is  moreover  supported  by  Josephus.  For  a  detailed 
study  of  the  question  I  must  refer  to  my  larger  Commentary. 


DANIEL  6.  8-10  53 

to  bring  in  the  enchanters,  the  Chaldeans,  and  the 
soothsayers.  The  king  spake  and  said  to  the  wise  men 
of  Babylon,  Whosoever  shall  read  this  writing,  and  shew 
me  the  interpretation  thereof,  shall  be  clothed  with 
purple,  and  have  a  chain  of  gold  about  his  neck,  and 
shall  *  be  the  third  ruler  in  the  kingdom.  Then  came  8 
in  all  the  king's  wise  men  :  but  they  could  not  read  the 
writing,  nor  make  known  to  the  king  the  interpretation. 
Then  was  king  Belshazzar  greatly  troubled,  and  his  9 
countenance  was  changed  in  him,  and  his  lords  were 
perplexed.     Now  the  queen  by  reason  of  the  words  of  10 

*  Or,  rule  as  one  of  three 

7.  enchanters,  &c.     See  note  on  ii.  2. 

purple.  The  successful  wise  man  was  to  be  clothed  with 
purple  — a  privilege  which  gave  him  a  royal  dignity  among  the 
Persians,  Esther  viii.  15,  and  the  right  of  being  called  the  king's 
friend  (i  Mace.  x.  20,  6a,  64,  xi.  58,  &c.\ 

chain  of  g-old.  Cf.  the  gift  of  Pharaoh  to  Joseph  (Gen.  xli. 
42)  ;  of  Cambyses  to  the  Ethiopians  in  Herod,  iii,  20  ;  and  of  the 
younger  C3TUS  to  Syennesis  (Xen.  Anab.  i.  2.  27).  According 
to  the  last  writer  iCyr.  xiii.  5.  18)  such  chains  could  only  be  worn 
when  presented  by  the  king.     Thus  they  formed  a  kind  of  order. 

shall  be  the  third  ruler.  This  translation  is  inaccurate,  as 
also  in  16,  29.  The  word  here  translated  *  third'  is  not  found 
elsewhere  as  the  ordinal.  The  proper  word  is  telithai.  Driver 
takes  it  to  be  connected  with  '  tilta  or  iulta,  which  both  in  the 
Targums  and  in  the  S^'riac  denotes  a  third  part.  .  .  .  Hence 
the  literal  rendering  appears  to  be  "  shall  rule  as  a  third  part  in  the 
kingdom  "  .  .  .  "  rule  as  one  of  three  '" '—  i.  e.  one  of  the  three  chief 
ministers.  Cf.  quotation  from  Esdras  below.  He  quotes  the  LXX 
here  in  support  of  this  rendering  :  hcQi]airai  avrw  k^ovaia  tuv 
rpiTuv  fifpovs  Tiyy  liaaiXelas.  Marti  adducing  i  Esdras  iii.  9  ot 
Tpds  ficyiffTcives  t^s  IlfpcriSos)  suggests  that  we  should  read  taliat  — 
trmmvir.  Wright  takes  this  to  mean  that  the  place  offered  was 
to  be  third  after  Nabuna'id  and  Belshazzar,  but  this  explanation 
requires  us  to  suppose  that  Nebuchadnezzar  was  not  the  father 
but  the  grandfather  of  Belshazzar. 

10.  According  to  the  LXX  (ver.  9)  the  king  summoned  the 
queen. 

the  queen.  That  this  queen  was  the  queen  mother  is  to  be 
inferred  from  the  facts,  first  that  she  is  not  included  among  the 


54  DANIEL  6.  n,  la 

the  king  and  his  lords  came  into  the  banquet  house :  the 
queen  spake  and  said,  O  king,  live  for  ever ;  let  not  thy 
thoughts  trouble  thee,  nor  let  thy  countenance  be 
changed :  there  is  a  man  in  thy  kingdom,  in  whom  is 
the  spirit  of  the  holy  gods  ;  and  in  the  days  of  thy  father 
light  and  understanding  and  wisdom,  like  the  wisdom  of 
the  gods,  was  found  in  him :  and  the  king  Nebuchad- 
nezzar thy  father,  a-the  king,  7  sav,  thy  father,  made  him 
master  of  the  magicians,  enchanters,  Chaldeans,  and 
soothsayers ;  forasmuch  as  an  excellent  spirit,  and  know- 
ledge, and  understanding,  interpreting  of  dreams,  and 
shewing  of  dark  sentences,  and  dissolving  of  doubts, 
*  Or,  thy  father,  O  king 

wives  of  the  king  (ver.  2;,  and  secondly  that  she  speaks  apparently 
from  personal  knowledge  of  the  events  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  reign 
(ver.  ii}.  In  Israel  and  Judah  the  queen-mother  enjoyed  great 
influence  :  see  i  Kings  xv.  13,  2  Kings  x.  13,  xxiv.  12  :  Herodotus 
mentions  in  this  respect  Amestris  fix.  109),  and  also  Nitokris  the 
wife  of  Nebuchadnezzar  (i.  185-188),  who  was  notable  for  her 
cleverness  and  wisdom. 

O  king,  live  for  ever.     Cf.  ii.  4. 

11.  in  whom  is  the  spirit.     See  iv.  8  note. 
wisdom,  like  .  .  ,  the  gods.     Cf.  2  Sam.  xiv.  20. 

the  king,  I  say,  thy  father.  These  words,  if  otherwise 
the  present  form  of  the  text  is  correct,  are  an  intrusion.  Theod. 
omits  them. 

made  him  master  of  the  magicians.     See  ii.  48. 

12.  interpreting  .  .  .  dissolving.  These  two  words  are 
participles  in  the  text,  but  by  a.  change  of  punctuation  can  be 
transformed  into  infinitives,  i.e.  nouns,  as  the  R.V.  has  done  with- 
out, however,  giving  notice  to  that  effect  in  the  margin.  We 
should,  further,  with  Marti,  either  insert  an  *  and  *  before  '  inter- 
preting' or  an  *  in  ' :  thus  'understanding  in  the  interpreting  of 
dreams,'  &c. 

shewing  of  dark  sentences.  The  Hebrew  form  of  this 
Aramaic  phrase  to  be  found  in  Judges  xiv.  14,  15,  19.  The  R.V. 
rendering  is  obscure.  Better  *  declaring  of  riddles'  or  ^  of  what  is 
hidden.'  The  Hebrew  synonym  (which  is  also  etymologically 
the  same)  means  'hard  questions'  in  1  Kings  x.  i,  'problem  '  or 
'enigma'  in  Ps.  xlix.  4. 


DANIEL  5.  13-17  55 

were  found  in  the  same  Daniel,  whom  the  king  named 
Belteshazzar.  Now  let  Daniel  be  called,  and  he  will 
shew  the  interpretation. 

Then  was  Daniel  brought  in  before  the  king.     The  13 
king  spake  and  said  unto  Daniel,  Art  thou  that  Daniel, 
which  art  of  the  children  of  the  captivity  of  Judah,  whom 
the  king  my  father  brought  out  of  Judah  ?    I  have  heard  14 
of  thee,  that  the  spirit  of  the  gods  is  in  thee,  and  that 
light  and  understanding  and  excellent  wisdom  is  found 
in  thee.    And  now  the  wise  men,  the  enchanters,  have  been  15 
brought  in  before  me,  that  they  should  read  this  writing, 
and  make  known  unto   me   the  interpretation  thereof: 
but  they  could  not  shew  the  interpretation  of  the  thing. 
But  I  have  heard  of  thee,  that  thou  canst  give  interpreta-  16 
tions,  and  dissolve  doubts :    now  if  thou  canst  read  the 
writing,    and   make    known    to    me    the    interpretation 
thereof,   thou   shalt   be   clothed  with  purple,  and   have 
a  chain  of  gold  about  thy  neck,  and  shalt  ^  be  the  third 
ruler  in  the  kingdom.     Then  Daniel  answered  and  said  17 
*  Or,  rule  as  one  0/ three 

dissolving'  of  doubts.  This  rendering  is  wrong.  Bevan 
has  rightly  taken  the  noun  to  mean  '  magic  knots,'  although 
unaware  of  the  parallel  in  i  Enoch  viii.  3  where  we  have  the 
Greek  equivalent,  i.  e.  eTraoibuv  Xvr-qpiov  '  the  resolving  of  enchant- 
ments.' In  I  Enoch  xcv.  4  we  have  *  anathemas  which  cannot  be 
reversed.'  Theodotion's  rendering  of  our  text  confirms  this  view, 
\voJv  avvSeafxovs. 

13-17.  Darnel  comes  before  the  king. 

13.  Art  thou  that  Daniel?  We  should,  as  the  pronoun  is 
emphatic,  render  'art  thou  Daniel?'  The  'that'  is  a  mistrans- 
lation. 

captivity.     Better  '  exile.'     Cf.  ii.  25,  vi.  13. 
16.  dissolve  doubts.     Read  'resolve  knots.'     See  ver.  12. 
shalt  be  the  third  ruler.     See  on  ver.  7. 

17-24.  Before  interpreting  the  v^rriting  Daniel  reminds  the 
king  of  the  pride  of  Nebuchadnezzar  his  father  ;  that,  notwith- 


56  DANIEL  5.  18-22 

before  the  king,  Let  thy  gifts  be  to  thyself,  and  give  thy 
rewards  to  another ;  nevertheless  I  will  read  the  writing 
unto  the  king,  and  make  known  to  him  the  interpreta- 

18  tion.  O  thou  king,  the  Most  High  God  gave  Nebuchad- 
nezzar thy  father  the  kingdom,  and  greatness,  and  glory, 

19  and  majesty  :  and  because  of  the  greatness  that  he  gave 
him,  all  the  peoples,  nations,  and  languages  trembled 
and  feared  before  him  :  whom  he  would  he  slew,  and 
whom  he  would  he  kept  alive ;   and  whom  he  would  he 

20  raised  up,  and  whom  he  would  he  put  down.  But  when 
his  heart  was  lifted  up,  and  his  spirit  was  hardened  that 
he  dealt  proudly,  he  was  deposed  from  his  kingly  throne, 

21  and  they  took  his  glory  from  him:  and  he  was  driven 
from  the  sons  of  men ;  and  his  heart  was  made  like  the 
beasts,  and  his  dwelling  was  with  the  wild  asses ;  he  was 
fed  with  grass  like  oxen,  and  his  body  was  wet  with  the 
dew  of  heaven :  until  he  knew  that  the  Most  High  God 
ruleth  in  the  kingdom  of  men,  and  that  he  setteth  up 

2  2  over   it   whomsoever   he   will.     And   thou   his   son,    O 

standing  the  warning  of  his  fate,  he  too  has  been  uplifted  by  pride 
and  has  challenged  the  power  of  the  God  of  heaven  by  his  pro- 
fanation  of  the  sacred  vessels  of  the  Temple. 

17.  Let  thy  gifts  be  to  thyself.  .  .  another.  These  words, 
which  conflict  with  ver.  29,  are  omitted  by  the  LXX. 

18.  the  king-dom,  &c.     Cf.  iv.  36. 

19.  whom  he  wonld  he  slew,  &c.  Cf.  i  Sam.  ii.  7,  Ps.  Ixxv. 
7,  Sir.  vii.  11,  Tob.  iv.  19. 

20.  his  gflory.  The  Massoretic  reads  '  (his^i  glory.'  We 
should  probably,  with  the  Peshitto,  read  'his  glory.'  Tiie  R.V. 
wrongly  represents  the  *  his  '  as  in  the  text. 

21.  This  verse  summarizes  statements  made  in  iv.  25,  32,  33. 
the  wild  asses.     These   animals  are   here   named   specially 

because  they  are  the  wildest  and  shyest  of  creatures  (Job  xxxix. 
5-8).  The  king  was  to  avoid  all  contact  with  mankind  as  much 
as  they.  But  there  is  something  to  be  said  for  the  reading  of  the 
solitary  MS.  which  gives  'adarayya^'  flocks'  instead  of  'aradayya 
'  wild  asses.'  Cf.  iv.  15,  25.  There  is  no  special  need  here  for 
intensifying  this  feature  of  the  punishment. 


DANIEL  5.  23-26  57 

Belshazzar,  hast  not  humbled  thine  heart,  though  thou 
knewest  all  this ;  but  hast  lifted  up  thyself  against  the  33 
Lord  of  heaven ;   and  they  have  brought  the  vessels  of 
his  house  before  thee,  and  thou  and  thy  lords,  thy  wives 
and  thy  concubines,  have  drunk  wine  in  them  ;  and  thou 
hast  praised  the  gods  of  silver,  and  gold,  of  brass,  iron, 
wood,  and  stone,  which  see  not,  nor  hear,  nor  know: 
and  the  God  in  whose  hand  thy  breath  is,  and  whose  are 
all  thy  ways,  hast  thou  not  glorified  :   then  was  the  part  24 
of  the  hand  sent  from  before  him,  and  this  writing  was 
inscribed.     And  this  is  the  writing  that  was  inscribed,  25 
'^  MENE,  MENE,  TEKEL,  UPHARSIN.     This  IS  the  interpre-  26 

*  That  is,  Numbered,  numbered,  weighed,  and  divisions. 

23.  of  silver,  and  gold.  Read,  with  Theod.,  'of  gold  and  of 
silver.' 

which  see  not,  &c.  The  unreasonableness  of  idolatry  is 
here  as  often  elsewhere  dwelt  on  :  cf.  Deut.  iv.  28,  Isa.  xliv.  9, 
Ps.  cxv.  5,  6,  cxxxv.  16,  Rev.  ix.  20.  The  Epistle  of  Jeremy  has 
this  subject  for  its  theme. 

thy  breath.     Cf.  Acts  xvii.  25. 

and  whose  are  all  thy  ways,  hast  thou  not  g^lorilied.  AH 
the  varied  activities  of  life  are  alike  dependent  on  Him.  Theod. 
connects  the  preposition  and  suffix  differently  :  *  and  all  thy  ways. 
Him  thou  hast  not  glorified.' 

24.  part  of  the  hand.     Read  '  palm  of  the  hand.' 

25-28.   The  writing  and  its  interpretation. 

25.  This  verse  has  been  variously  interpreted,  but  no  interpreta- 
tion seems  as  yet  definitive,  i".  The  usual  one  is  that  Mene, 
inene,  tekel,  upharsin,  means  'Counted,  counted,  weighed  and 
pieces.'  Against  this  it  is  to  be  observed  that  tekel  and  p^res  cannot 
mean  'weighed'  and  'divided,'  as  the  interpretation  in  verses  27, 
28  demands.  These  words  in  their  present  form  are  substantives. 
Further  the  explanation  in  26-28  takes  no  account  of  the  repeti- 
tion of  mene  SLud  simply  replaces  upharsin  hy  pe res.  From  these 
facts  it  is  inferred  that  no  very  close  connexion  exists  between 
the  inscription  and  its  interpretation,  and  that,  as  Bevan  has 
suggested,  the  words  themselves  were  not  arbitrarily  invented  by 
the  author  but  borrowed  from  some  other  source.  In  that  source 
they  must  have  already  stood  in  some  relation  to  the  events  in 
the  text,  else   our  author  would  hardly  have  used   them  in  his 


58  DANIEL  5. 36 

tation  of  the  thing :    mene  ;    God  hath  numbered  thy 


account,  since  the  interpretation  in  26-28  is  a  real  tour  deforce^ 
resorted  to  in  order  to  give  them  a  meaning  in  regard  to  the 
present  crisis, 

a".  Owing  to  these  difficulties  many  modern  scholars,  including 
Noldeke,  Bevan,  Driver,  and  Marti,  have  accepted  the  explanation 
put  forward  by  Clermont-Ganneau  {Journal  Ast'aiique,  '  Mane, 
Thecal,  Phares,'  1886),  who  points  out  that  this  inscription  consists 
simply  of  the  names  of  three  weights.  Thus  w/«^'is  the  Aramaic 
equivalent  of  the  Hebrew  mdneh,  which  was  borrowed  by  the 
Greeks  and  written  fiva,  Latin,  ntina.  T^kel  is  the  Aramaic  form 
of  the  Hebrew  shekel.     Parsin  is  the  plural  oi pifres  in  ver.  28. 

The  peras  in  the  Mishnah  and  other  Jewish  writings  is  the  desig- 
nation for  half  a  mina.  Thus  the  inscription  is — a  mina^  a  mina, 
a  shekel  and  half  a  mina.  The  strange  order  of  the  coins  in  this 
inscription  has  led  to  the  suggestion  that  the  mina— the  greatest 
weight — refers  to  the  great  king  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  shekel 
( —  one-sixtieth  of  a  mina),  to  Belshazzar,  and  the  two  half- 
minas  to  the  kingdoms  of  the  Medes  and  Persians  arising  out  of 
Nebuchadnezzar's  kingdom.  In  this  view  the  words  formed  a 
current  saying  which  described  in  a  humorous  way  the  history 
of  Babylon  and  its  overthrow.  Finally  Haupt  and  Prince  remark 
that  the  first  mene  is  to  be  taken  as  a  participle  =  *  counted '. 
Thus  we  should  have  '  it  was  counted,  a  mina,  a  shekel  and  two 
half-minas.' 

3".  Still  another  explanation  is  offered  by  Winckler  in  KAT., 
341.  According  to  Winckler  it  is  obvious  that  in  the  text,  'a 
mina,  a  mina,  a  shekel  and  half  a  mina,'  the  word  'shekel'  is  an 
interpolation.  We  have  then  aj  minas  which  represent  2^  years, 
on  the  expiration  of  which  Cambyses,  who  is  the  Belshazzar 
that  desecrates  the  Temple  vessels,  shall  die.  According  to 
Winckler  the  chief  incidents  attributed  to  Belshazzar  were  origin- 
ally recounted  in  connexion  with  Cambyses.  For  2]  years  more 
— such  is  the  real  meaning  of '  a  time,  times  and  half  a  time'  in 
vii.  25,  xii.  7 — worship  in  the  Temple  was  suspended.  These 
fractions  originated  in  the  method  of  reckoning  time  by  lustres  or 
periods  of  five  years,  which  in  a  subsequent  redaction  of  the 
book  was  displaced  b}'  the  later  method  of  reckoning  by  weeks  of 
years.     See  KAT.,  284  sq. 

4".  Not  improbably  the  text  itself  is  wrong,  and  the  Versions  are 
right,  i.  e.  mane,  tekel,  pares.  Thus,  according  toTheod.and  the  Vul- 
gate in  V.  25,  according  to  LXX  in  the  title  to  the  chapter,  the 
inscription  was  written  :  mane,  tekel,  pares.  The  reading  of  the 
Massoretic  {upharsin,  i.e. «  '  and,^  parsin  'half  minas'  or'  Persians') 
would  then  be  explained  as  an  explanatory  marginal  gloss^  which 


DANIEL  5.  27-31  59 

kingdom,  and  brought  it  to  an  end.     tekel;  thou  art  27 
weighed  in  the  balances,  and  art  found  wanting.    "  peres  ;  28 
thy  kingdom  is  divided,  and  given  to  the  Medes  and 
Persians.      Then    commanded     Belshazzar,     and     they  29 
clothed  Daniel  with  purple,   and  put  a  chain  of  gold 
about  his  neck,  and  made  proclamation  concerning  him, 
that  he  should  ^be  the  third  ruler  in  the  kingdom.     In  30 
that  night  Belshazzar  the  Chaldean  king  was  slain.    And  3' 
Darius  the  Mede  received  the  kingdom,  being  about 
threescore  and  two  years  old. 

*  That  is,  Divided  ^  Or,  rule  as  one  of  three 

simply  meant 'Persians,'  which  subsequently  displaced  the  original 
peres  or  rsiihtr pares  (as  in  Versions).  Moreover  the  interpretation 
in  26-28  presupposes  this  to  be  the  inscription,  and  likewise  the 
account  of  Josephus,  .^w/".  x.  11.3.  The  three  words  would  then 
refer  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  Belshazzar,  and  the  Persians,  and  the 
relative  merits  of  the  first  two  exhibited  by  the  comparison  of  the 
mina  and  shekel.  Each  word  had  thus  a  double  signification. 
Mane  (so  Versions,  though  it  should  be  read  mand)  would  mean 
*  mina,'  but  would  suggest  nicne,  '  numbered  ' :  hence  the  days  of 
Belshazzar  are  numbered;  iekei  means  'shekel,'  but  points  to 
tekel '  weighed  ' — hence  '  thou  art  weighed,'  &c. ;  pares  (i.  e.  paras) 
means  'Persian'  and  suggests  peres  (=  divided):  'thy  kingdom 
is  divided  and  given  to  the  Persians.*  Perhaps  it  would  be  better 
to  take  pares  in  the  Versions  as  a  mistake  for  peras  =  '  half  a 
mina.'  The  inscription  would  then  run :  mane,  tekel,  peras,  i.  e, 
'  mina,  shekel,  half  a  mina,'  where  peras  (=  '  half  a  mina')  would 
be  a  comment  on  Belshazzar  as  a  worthless  son  of  a  great  father, 
and  would  likewise  suggest  paras  '  the  Persians.' 

29.  the  third  rtiler.     See  note  on  7. 

31.  Darius  the  Mede.  Our  author  clearly  believed  (i)  that 
Darius  was  the  sole  and  independent  sovereign  of  the  Babylonian 
Empire,  and  (2)  that  his  reign  intervened  between  the  Babylonian 
and  Persian  dynasties. 

1".  Darius  is  not  conceived  as  a  vassal  king,  but  as  an  inde- 
pendent sovereign  ;  for  he  enjo}  s  the  title  of  king  (vi.  3,  7,  8,  9, 
12,  13,  &c.)  :  as  sole  ruler  divides  the  vast  empire  into  120  satra- 
pies (vi.  i^,  and  as  absolute  despot  sentences  all  the  rulers  of  these 
satrapies  to  death  by  a  single  decree  (vi.  24).  When  he  dies  he  is 
succeeded  by  Cyrus  the  Persian  (vi.  28).  That  our  text,  therefore, 
regards   Darius  the   Mede  as   the  sole  and   absolute  king  of  the 

H 


6o  DANIEL  6.  i 

6  It  pleased  Darius  to  set  over  the  kingdom  an 
hundred  and  twenty  satraps,  which  should  be  through- 
Babylonian  empire  cannot  be  questioned.  In  this  respect,  there- 
fore, even  if  it  were  proved  that  Cyrus  made  Gobryas  his  general 
king  of  Babylon  and  gave  him  the  name  of  Darius,  it  would  be 
impossible  to  reconcile  the  conception  of  Darius  in  our  text  with 
that  of  a  vassal  king  such  as  this  Gobryas. 

a".  According  to  our  author  a  Median  king  reigned  between 
the  Babylonian  and  Persian  sovereignties.  This  is  the  natural 
meaning  of  vi.  28  (cf.  ix.  i,  2,  xi.  i  with  x.  i).  But  (a)  this 
view  is  against  Isa.  xl-xlviii  (post -exilic'',,  where  Cyrus  is  repre- 
sented as  having  been  God's  agent  in  overthrowing  Babylon,  and 
becoming  its  king.  No  Median  dynasty  intervenes.  In  Ezra 
v.  13  he  is  called  '  king  of  Babylon,'  though  elsewhere  more 
frequently  '  king  of  the  Persians,'  aChron.  xxxvi.  22,  Ezra  i.  i.  &c. 
{b  i  Neither  Berosus  nor  any  ancient  writer  knows  anything  of 
a  Median  sovereignty  after  the  fall  of  Babylon,  (c)  In  the  annals 
of  Nabuna'id  and  the  Cyrus  cylinder  Cyrus  is  the  immediate 
successor  of  Nabuna'id  on  the  throne  of  Babylon. 

In  short,  no  room  can  be  found  in  the  sacred  records  for  Cyrus 
in  the  reign  of  Darius,  and  none  for  Darius  in  the  reign  of  C3'rus 
in  the  secular  records,  so  far  as  our  present  knowledge  goes. 

The  idea  that  a  Median  king  ruled  over  the  world  after  the 
overthrow  of  the  Babylonian  kingdom  is  probably  to  be  traced, 
as  Bevan  has  suggested,  to  two  facts.  The  first  of  them  is  that  it 
was  known  that  a  Median  empire  had  existed  before  the  Persians 
had  established  their  supremacy.  The  second  is  to  be  traced  to 
our  author's  study  of  O.T.  prophecy,  where  it  was  foretold  that 
the  Medes  would  conquer  Babylon  :  Isa.  xiii.  17,  Jer.  li.  11,  28. 
That  these  prophecies  had  been  fulfilled  in  default  of  any  know- 
ledge to  the  contrary  was  a  natural  supposition  on  the  part  of  our 
author. 

received  tlxe  king>doin :  i.  e.  from  God.    Cf.  28,  '  given  to  the 
Medes  and  Persians.' 

vi.  In  iii.  1-30  the  aim  of  our  author  was  to  direct  his  people 
how  to  act  in  their  relations  to  a  heathen  religion  and  to  admonish 
them  not  to  acknowledge  or  share  in  its  worship,  but  rather  to 
prefer  death  to  apostasy.  In  this  chapter  it  is  his  aim  to  enforce 
the  duty  of  observing  their  own  religion.  And  since  during  the 
exile  this  observance  could  not  extend  beyond  acts  of  private  and 
personal  worship,  it  is  just  this  side  of  the  Jewish  religion  that  has 
to  be  brought  forward  here,  and  it  is  the  necessity  of  emphasizing 
this  side  that  obliged  our  author  to  introduce  certain  unlikely  or 
incredible  features  into  his  story,  such  as  the  king's  issuing  such 


DANIEL  6.  2-6  6i 

out  the  whole  kingdom  ;  and  over  them  three  presidents,  2 
of  whom  Daniel  was  one ;  that  these  satraps  might  give 
account  unto  them,  and  that  the  king  should  have  no 
damage.     Then  this  Daniel  was  distinguished  above  the  3 
presidents  and  the  satraps,  because  an  excellent  spirit 
was  in  him ;  and  the  king  thought  to  set  him  over  the 
whole  realm.    Then  the  presidents  and  the  satraps  sought  4 
to  find  occasion  against  Daniel  as  touching  the  kingdom  ; 
but  they  could  find  none  occasion  nor  fault ;  forasmuch 
as  he  was  faithful,  neither  was  there  any  error  or  fault 
found  in  him.     Then   said   these  men,  We   shall   not  5 
find  any  occasion  against  this  Daniel,  except  we  find  it 
against  him  concerning  the  law  of  his  God.     Then  these  6 


a  preposterous  edict  as  that  in  the  text  and  his  failure  to  consult 
the  chiefest  and  wisest  of  his  great  officers  before  issuing  such  an 
edict.  These  and  other  such  features,  however,  appear  no  longer 
unreasonable  when  they  serve  to  manifest  Daniel's  faithful  observ- 
ance of  his  religion  in  private.  By  such  a  story  or  parable  our 
author  sought  to  encourage  his  countrymen,  who  under  the 
persecution  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  were  precluded  in  the  main 
from  all  acts  of  public  worship,  to  be  true  and  hold  fast  to  the  life 
of  private  devotion,  even  as  Daniel  had  done. 

1-2.  Darius  appoints  120  satraps  with  three  presidents,  of 
whom  Daniel  was  chief. 

1.  an  hundred  and  twenty  satraps.  On  'satraps'  see  iii.  2. 
According  to  Herodotus  iii.  Sgsqq.,  the  kingdom  was  divided  into 
20  satrapies,  and  this  was  first  done  under  Darius  H  vsLaspis.  In 
Esther  i.  i,  viii.  9,  i  Esdras  iii.  2,  Add.  to  Esther  ii.  i,  v.  i  there 
were  127  provinces.  Tiie  number  in  our  text  may  have  been 
suggested  thereby. 

2.  presidents.  The  Aram,  word,  which  is  found  also  in  the 
Targums,  is  said  to  be  from  the  Persian  sarak  '  chief  from  sar 
'  head.' 

3.  excellent  spirit  was  in  him.     Cf.  v.  12. 

4.  as  touching  the  kingdom,  i.  e.  in  his  administration  of  his 
official  duties  in  contrast  to  his  observance  of  his  religious  duties 
(ver.  5). 

neither  was  there    any  error  ...  in  him.    This  clause 

should  be  exercised  as  a  dittograph.     The  LXX  and  Theod.  omit. 

6.  law.     The  same  dath  is  here  used  for  law  as  in  ii.  9,  13,  15, 

H  2 


62  DANIEL  6.  7 

presidents  and  satraps  »  assembled  together  to  the  king, 
7  and  said  thus  unto  him,  King  Darius,  Hve  for  ever.  All 
the  presidents  of  the  kingdom,  the  deputies  and  the 
satraps,  the  counsellors  and  the  governors,  have  consulted 
together  ^to  establish  a  royal  statute,  and  to  make  a  strong 

*  Or,  came  tttmultuously  (and  so  in  vv.  ir,  15) 

^  Or,  that  the  king  should  establish  a  statute,  and  make  &c. 

vi.  8,   12,  15.      Here,  as   in   Ezra  vii.   12,   14  sq.,  it  denotes  the 
Jewish  law. 

6.  assembled  tog-ether :  Aram,  hargtshu,  R.V.  marg.  'came 
tumultuousl}'.'  The  best  modern  scholars  support  the  latter 
rendering — adducing  the  Aramaic  of  the  Targums  on  Ruth  i.  9, 
Ps.  xlvi.  6,  and  the  Hebrew  in  Ps,  ii.  i.  This  word  occurs 
again  in  vi.  11,  15.  But  the  translation  'came  tumultuously '  is 
not  suitable  to  the  context  either  in  vi.  6  or  in  vi.  11.  In  the 
former  verse,  where  the  presidents  and  satraps  are  approaching 
the  king  with  a  view  to  securing  a  favour,  such  a  manner  of 
approach  would  be  unseemly.  They  wish  to  secure  the  king's 
assent  to  a  law  which  they  are  secretly  directing  against  Daniel. 
Here  the  LXX  renders  TrpuarjXOoaav,  which  elsewhere  in  this 
book  is  always  a  rendering  of  keribu  as  it  is  also  in  Thcodotion. 
The  Peshitto  actually  gives  this  Aramaic  word.  Hence  it  is  not 
at  all  improbable  that  keribu  stood  originally  in  the  text,  and  that 
we  should  render  :  '  Then  these  presidents  .  .  .  drew  near  to  the 
king.' 

Now  turning  to  vi.  ii  we  observe  how  hopelessly  unsuitable 
the  words  '  came  thronging '  or  '  tumultuously  '  are  in  such  a  con- 
nexion. The  presidents  and  other  great  officers  of  the  king  have 
succeeded  in  getting  a  law  enacted  against  Daniel.  Their  next 
object  is  to  detect  Daniel  in  the  act  of  breaking  this  law.  What 
writer  would  in  such  a  case  represent  them  as  '  flocking  tumul- 
tuously '  to  Daniel's  house.  Here  again  the  Versions  come  to  our 
aid.  The  LXX,  Theodotion,  the  Peshitto,  and  Vulgate  give  the 
rendering  'kept  watch'  or  '  spied  upon.'  Now  this  meaning  of 
hargishu  is  actually  found  in  the  Jerusalem  Targum  of  E.xod.  ii.  3 
and  in  Hebrew  in  the  Mishna  of  the  Jerusalem  Talmud.  Hence 
we  should  without  hesitation  render  :  '  Then  these  men  kept 
watch  upon  and  found  Daniel  praying.'     On  vi.  15  see  note. 

*7.  All  the  presidents.  Is  this  misrepresentation  made  delibe- 
rately in  order  to  lead  the  king  to  believe  that  Daniel  had  taken 
part  in  this  appeal  to  the  king? 

the  deputies  and  the  satraps,  &c.     See  note  on  iii.  a. 
to  establish  a  royal  statute.    The  R.V.  margin  here  is  best 
'that  the  king  should  establish  a  statute.'     The  officers  of  the 


DANIEL  G.  8-10  63 

interdict,  that  whosoever  shall  ask  a  petition  of  any  god 
or  man  for  thirty  days,  save  of  thee,  O  king,  he  shall  be 
cast  into  the  den  of  lions.     Now,  O  king,  establish  the  S 
interdict,  and  sign  the  writing,  that  it  be  not  changed, 
according  to  the  law  of  the  Medes  and  Persians,  which 
^altereth  not.    Wherefore  king  Darius  signed  the  writing  9 
and   the  interdict.     And   when    Daniel  knew  that  the  10 
writing  was  signed,  he  went  into  his  house ;    (now  his 
windows  were  open  in  his  chamber  toward  Jerusalem ;) 
and  he  kneeled  upon  his  knees  three  times  a  day,  and 

*  Aram,  passeth  not  aivay. 

king  could  not  do  so  themselves  :  the  king  does  so  in  vi.  9.  The 
difficulty  is  due  to  the  subject  of  the  infinitive  being  placed  at 
the  end  of  the  clause. 

or  man.  These  words  are  omitted  by  the  LXX  and  appar- 
ently rightly.  For  that  no  man  should  be  allowed  for  thirty  daj^s 
to  make  a  single  request  of  any  of  his  neighbours  is  too  extravagant 
to  be  taken  seriously.  The  text  is  concerned  only  with  prayer 
directed  to  a  god.  This  is  clear  from  ver,  8,  where  Daniel's 
enemies  admit  that  they  can  find  no  occasion  against  him  save  in 
the  law  of  his  God. 

save  of  thee,  O  king-.  For  thirty  days  the  king  would  be 
honoured  as  a  god. 

den  of  lions.  The  Assyrian  and  Persian  kings  kept  lions  in 
enclosures  for  hunting  purposes, 

8.  which  altereth  not.     Cf.  Esther  i.  19,  viii.  8. 
10.  now  his  windows,  &c.     More  literally :   '  now  he  had  in 
his  chamber  windows  opening.' 

windows.  These  were  of  the  nature  of  lattices  :  cf.  Prov.vii.  6. 

his  chamber.  Aram,  'illitheh  :  cf.  the  Greek  virtpcLov.  The 
chamber  was  an  apartment  raised  on  the  flat  roof  of  the  house  : 
cf.  Acts  X.  9  km  TO  baifxa.  Such  a  chamber  was  specially  used  for 
prayer,  mourning,  and  acts  of  devotion  :  cf.  Isa.  xxii.  i,  Ps.  cii.  7, 
Acts  X.  9,  Judith  viii.  5  It  was  such  a  chamber  that  was  built  on 
the  roof  for  Elisha  by  the  Shunammite,  2  Kings  iv.  10. 

toward  Jerusalem.  The  custom  of  turning  to  the  east 
became  usual,  no  doubt,  from  the  Exile  onwards.  Cf.  Tob.  iii.  11, 
I  Esdras  iv,  58,  Berakli.  iv.  5,  6,  Authority  for  turning  to 
Jerusalem  was  to  be  found  in  i  Kings  viii.  44,  towards  the  Temple 
in  viii.  35,  48,     Cf.  Ezek.  viii,  16  sqq.,  Ps.  v.  7,  xxviii.  2. 

Uiree  times  a  day.     Cf.  Ps.  Iv.   17,  2  Enoch  li.  4.     These 


64  DANIEL  6.  11-13 

prayed,  and  gave  thanks  before  his  God,  as  he  did  afore- 

11  time.  Then  these  men  assembled  together,  and  found 
Daniel  making  petition  and  supplication  before  his  God. 

12  Then  they  came  near,  and  spake  before  the  king  con- 
cerning the  king's  interdict ;  Hast  thou  not  signed  an 
interdict,  that  every  man  that  shall  make  petition  unto 
any  god  or  man  within  thirty  days,  save  unto  thee,  O 
king,  shall  be  cast  into  the  den  of  lions?  The  king 
answered  and  said,  The  thing  is  true,  according  to  the 
law  of  the  Medes   and  Persians,  which  «^altereth   not. 

13  Then  answered  they  and  said  before  the  king,  That 
Daniel,  which  is  of  the  children  of  the  captivity  of  Judah, 

^  Aram,  passetit  not  aivay. 


three  liours  were  at  the  time  of  the  morning  burnt-offering,  in  the 
afternoon  when  the  evening  meal  was  offered— the  ninth  hour: 
cf.  ix.  21,  Ezra  ix.  5,  Judith  ix.  i,  Acts  iii.  i,  x.  30.  and  at  sunset ; 
Berakh.  iii.  3,  iv.  i. 

before  his  God.  As  Dalman  {The  Words  of  Jesus,  209-13) 
points  out,  it  was  the  practice  of  the  later  Jews  to  speak,  pray,  or 
confess  before  God  rather  than  to  Him.  Likewise  a  man  was  said 
to  blaspheme  or  sin  before  God,  i.e.  against  Him.  This  was  due 
to  their  sense  of  reverence.  And  as  divine  honours  were  in  part 
paid  to  oriental  monarchs  this  usage  was  extended  to  them.  Thus 
men  spoke  not  to  the  king  but  before  him.  Cf.  ii.  9,  10,  11,  27,  36, 
V.  17.  In  vi.  22  Daniel  affirms  that  he  has  done  no  wrong  before 
the  king.  But  the  above  usage  was  carried  still  further,  and 
actions  were  said  to  have  been  done  or  left  undone  before  God, 
when  the  actions  in  question  were  those  which  God  Himself 
either  did  or  did  not  do.  Thus  in  Luke  xii.  6,  the  words  'not 
one  of  them  is  forgotten  in  the  sight  of  God '  means  God  does  not 
forget  one  of  them.  Even  volition  might  not  be  directly  predicated 
of  God  :  in  Malt  xviii.  14  the  text,  literallj'  rendered,  is  :  'it 
is  not  a  thing  willed  before  {OfXrjfxa  (finpoaOfv)  your  Father  which 
is  in  heaven.'  That  is,  God  does  not  will  that.  Or  again  in  Matt. 
xi.  26  '  so  it  was  well-pleasing  in  thy  sight.' 

11.  assembled  togfether.      Read  'kept  watch   on'  or   'spied 
upon.'     See  note  on  ver.  6. 

12.  or  man.     We  should  omit  these  words  as  in  ver.  7  (see 
note)  with  the  LXX. 


DANIEL  6.  14-18  65 

regardeth  not  thee,  O  king,  nor  the  interdict  that  thou 
hast  signed,  but  maketh  his  petition  three  times  a  day. 
Then  the  king,  when  he  heard  these  words,  was  sore  14 
displeased,  and  set  his  heart  on  Daniel  to  deliver  him  : 
and  he  laboured  till  the  going  down  of  the  sun  to  rescue 
him.    Then  these  men  assembled  together  unto  the  king,  15 
and  said  unto  the  king,  Know,  O  king,  that  it  is  a  law 
of  the  Medes  and  Persians,  that  no  interdict  nor  statute 
which  the  king  establisheth  may  be  changed.     Then  the  ^6 
king  commanded,  and  they  brought  Daniel,  and  cast  him 
into  the  den  of  lions.    Now  the  king  spake  and  said  unto 
Daniel,  Thy  God  whom  thou  servest  continually,  he  will 
deliver  thee.     And  a  stone  was  brought,  and  laid  upon  17 
the  mouth  of  the  den ;  and  the  king  sealed  it  with  his 
own  signet,  and  with  the  signet  of  his  lords;  ^  that  nothing 
might  be  changed  concerning  Daniel.     Then  the  king  18 
went  to  his  palace,  and  passed  the  night  fasting :  neither 
were  ^'  instruments  of  music  brought  before  him  :  and  his 
*  Or,  that  there  might  he  no  change  of  purpose       "^  Or,  dancing  girls 

13.  reg-ardeth  not  thee.  Read  ' obeyeth  not  thee'  as  in 
iii.  12  (see  note). 

maketh  Ms  petition.     Add  with  the  LXX  and  Theod.  *  to 
his  God.'     Cf.  verses  10.  ir. 

15.  This  verse  comes  in  here  awkwardly.  In  the  preceding 
verse  the  text  presupposes  Daniel's  adversaries  as  present  before 
the  king.  What  then  is  to  be  made  of  this  verse  which  begins  : 
'Then  these  men  assembled  together'?  Something  seems  wrong. 
We  might  perhaps  with  Theodotion  omit  the  words  'assembled 
together  unto  the  king  and  '.  This  certainly  removes  the  difficulty. 
But  the  order  and  possibly  the  form  of  the  text  in  the  LXX  are 
probably  to  be  preferred,  which  omits  the  above  clause  and  trans- 
fers this  verse  before  ver.  13.  The  text  of  the  LXX,  which 
diverges  greatly  here,  is  in  part  supported  by  the  account  in 
Josephus.     See  my  larger  Commentary  for  details. 

17.  his  own  signet.  Seals  were  used  throughout  the  ancient 
world.  See  Art.  'Ring'  in  the  Encvc.  Bib.  and  'Seal'  in 
Hastings'  BD. 

18.  instruments  of  mxisic.     The  real  meaning  of  the  word 


66  DANIEL  6.  19-24 

19  sleep  fled  from  him.  Then  the  king  arose  very  early  in 
the  morning,  and  went  in  haste  unto  the  den  of  lions. 

20  And  when  he  came  nearunto  the  den  to  Daniel,  he  cried 
with  a  lamentable  voice :  the  king  spake  and  said  to 
Daniel,  O  Daniel,  servant  of  the  living  God,  is  thy  God, 
whom  thou  servest  continually,  able  to  deliver  thee  from 

21  the  lions?    Then  said  Daniel  unto  the  king,  O  king,  live 
33  for  ever.     My  God  hath  sent  his  angel,  and  hath  shut 

the  lions'  mouths,  and  they  have  not  hurt  me  :  forasmuch 
as  before  him  innocency  was  found  in  me;   and  also 

33  before  thee,  O  king,  have  I  done  no  hurt.  Then  was 
the  king  exceeding  glad,  and  commanded  that  they 
should  take  Daniel  up  out  of  the  den.  So  Daniel  was 
taken  up  out  of  the  den,  and  no  manner  of  hurt  was 
found  upon  him,  because  he  had  trusted  in  his  God. 

24  And  the  king  commanded,  and  they  brought  those  men 
which  had  accused  Daniel,  and  they  cast  them  into  the 
den  of  lions,  them,  their  children,  and  their  wives ;  and 
the  lions  had  the  mastery  of  them,  and  brake  all  their 
bones  in  pieces,  or  ever  they  came  at  the  bottom  of 
the  den. 


dahawan  is  unknown.  Theodotion  and  the  Peshitto  render  it 
'  foods,'  Ibn  Ezra  '  stringed  instruments,'  Saadi,  *  dancing  girls.' 
It  is  perhaps  best,  with  Marti  and  Prince,  to  regard  dachawan  as 
corrupt  for  I'henan  =  'concubines'  (v.  2,  3,  23V 

But  it  is  possible  that  the  text  is  here  simply  corrupt,  and  that 
for  'ji-jn  n"?  pm  we  should  with  the  LXX  and  Josephus  read 
"jS'n  '"^V  mn  'ii  =  '  he  grieved  about  Daniel.'  Dahawan  would 
then  be  a  vox  nihili. 

20.  the  living-  God.     Cf.  Deut.  v.  26,  Joshua  iii.  lo,  &c. 

22.  before  thee.     See  note  on  ver.  10. 

24.  accused.     See  iii.  8,  note. 

had  the  mastsry  of  them,  or  '  fell  upon  them,"  as  in  the 
Targums  on  2  Sam.  i.  15,  and  in  the  corresponding  Hebrew  in 
Esther  ix.  i  according  to  many  scholars. 

or  ever:  a  reduplicated  form  of  '  ere'  =  '  before.' 


DANIEL  6.  25-28-7.  I  67 

Then  king  Darius  wrote  unto  all  the  peoples,  nations,  25 
and  languages,  that  dwell  in  all  the  earth ;    Peace  be 
multiplied  unto  you.     I  make  a  decree,  that  in  all  the  26 
dominion  of  my  kingdom  men  tremble  and  fear  before 
the  God  of  Daniel :  for  he  is  the  living  God,  and  stedfast 
for   ever,   and   his   kingdom    that   which   shall   not    be 
destroyed,  and  his  dominion  shall  be  even  unto  the  end : 
he  delivereth  and  rescueth,  and  he  worketh  signs  and  27 
wonders  in  heaven  and  in   earth ;    who  hath  delivered 
Daniel  from  the  power  of  the   lions.     So  this  Daniel  28 
prospered  in  the  reign  of  Darius,  and  in  the  reign  of  Cyrus 
the  Persian. 

In  the  first  year  of  Belshazzar  king  of  Babylon  Daniel  7 

25-28.  The  edict  of  the  king.  This  edict  is  composed  almost 
wholly  of  turns  and  phrases  found  in  the  earlier  chapters,  and  the 
essential  thought  of  the  historical  section  of  the  book  is  here  set 
forth  in  metrical  form. 

25.  Cf.  iv.  I. 

26.  I  make  a  decree.     So  iii.  29. 

tremble  and  fear.     This  phrase  has  been  used  in  reference 
to  Nebuchadnezzar  iri  v.  19. 

26'*-27.  The  text  should  probably  be  arranged  as  follows  : 

*  For  he  is  the  living  God, 
And  he  abideth  for  ever  : 

And  his  kingdom  is  one  that  cannot  be  destroyed, 
And  his  dominion  is  everlasting  : 
He  delivereth   and  rescueth, 
And  worketh   signs  and  wonders 
In  heaven  and  in  earth, 
Who  hath  delivered  Daniel 
From  the  power  of  the  lions.' 

26.  his  king'dom,  &c.     Cf.  ii.  44,  iv.  3,  34  b,  vii.  14,  27. 

27.  delivereth  and  rescueth.     Cf  iii,  28,  29. 
sigTis  and  wonders.     Cf.  iv.  2,  3. 

from  the  power.     This  general  expression  recalls  llic  more 
definite  one  in  i  Sam.  xvii.  37  'from  the  claws  of  the  lion.' 

VII-XII.     The  Visions  of  Daniel. 
vii.  The  vision  in  this  chapter  is  parallel  with  that  in  chapter  ii. 


68  DANIEL  7.  i 

» had  a  dream  and  visions  of  his  head  upon  his  bed : 

*  Aram.  saw. 


The  four  world  kingdoms  followed  by  a  fifth— that  of  the  Saints — 
are  the  subject  of  both,  the  four  kingdoms  being  symbolized  by 
the  four  parts  of  the  great  image  in  ii  and  the  four  beasts  in  vii. 

Three  questions  call  for  consideration.  These  are  i°.  The  four 
world  empires.    2".  The  ten  horns.    3".  The  three  horns  plucked  up. 

The  Four  World  Empires.  Only  two  interpretations  that  gained 
the  suffrages  of  the  centuries  immediately  following  the  publication 
of  Daniel  have  any  claims  to  consideration  here. 

1°.  The  first,  of  which  only  a  few,  but  undubitable,  traces 
survive,  identified  the  fourth  kingdom  with  the  Greek  empire, 
the  other,  which  is  attested  in  the  first  century  of  the  Christian 
era,  but  probably  originated  earlier,  identified  it  with  the  Roman 
empire.  It  goes  without  saying  that,  if  the  latter  had  been  first 
in  the  field,  the  former  could  never  have  gained  a  hearing  after 
the  close  of  the  second  century  B.C. ;  for  then  the  Roman  and  not 
the  Greek  empire  was  all  powerful  in  the  East.  This  first  inter- 
pretation, which  is  also  the  true  one,  passed  out  of  currency  just 
because  history  had  failed  to  confirm  it.  In  this,  as  in  other 
instances  of  unfulfilled  prophecy,  the  faithful  applied  themselves 
anew  to  the  study  of  the  prophecy  in  question,  and  so  a  fresh 
interpretation  of  the  four  kingdoms  was  issued,  which  discovered 
in  the  fourth  kingdom  the  empire  of  Rome. 

Since  this  is  a  simple  statement  of  historical  fact,  it  will  be 
unnecessary  to  enter  here  on  the  vagaries  of  mediaeval  and 
modern  hermeneutics  on  this  chapter.  It  will  be  sufficient  to 
give  briefly  the  evidence  for  the  above  statements. 

(a)  According  to  the  older  and  true  interpretation  the  four 
kingdoms  were  (i)  the  Babylonian,  (2)  the  Median,  (3)  the 
Persian,  (4)  the  Greek  or  Macedonian.  The  identification  of  the 
Selucidae  or  Greek  rulers  of  Syria  with  the  fourth  kingdom  first 
appears,  though  in  a  veiled  form,  as  befits  the  character  of  the 
work,  in  the  Sibylline  Oracles,  iii.  388-400.  This  portion  of  the 
book,  which  was  written  not  later  than  140  b.c,  refers  to  the  ten 
horns  of  our  text. 

388  *  One  day  there  shall  come  unexpectedly  to  Asia's  wealthy 

land 
A  man  clad  with  a  purple  cloak  upon  his  shoulders, 
Savage,   a  stranger  to  justice,   fiery ;    for  he  hath  exalted 

himself 
Even  against  the  thunder,  a  mortal  as  he  is.     And  all  Asia 

shall  have  an  evil  yoke, 
And  the  drenched  earth  shall  drink  large  draughts  of  blood. 


DANIEL  7.  r  69 

then  he  wrote  the  dream  and  told  the  sum  of  the  matters. 


But  even  so  Hades  shall  attend  him  utterly  destroyed. 
By  the  race  of  those  whose  family  he  wishes  to  destroy 
395     By  them  shall  his  own  family  be  destroyed. 

Yet  after  leaving  one  root,  which  the  Destroyer  shall  cut  off 
From  among  ten  horns,  he  shall  put  forth  a  side  shoot. 
He  shall  cut  down  the  warrior  parent  of  the  purple  race, 
And  fhe  himself  at  the  hand  of  his  grandsons  shall  perish 
in  a  like  fate  of  warf  : 
400     And  then  a  parasite  horn  shall  have  dominion.' 

(Translated  by  Lanchester  in  Charles' 
Apocrypha  and  Pseudepigrapha^  ii.  385-86.) 

In  these  verses  we  have  the  interpretation  put  on  the  ten  horns 
of  the  fourth  kingdom.  It  may  not,  it  is  true,  agree  exactly  with 
any  modern  identification  of  the  ten  'horns'  or  kings,  but  it  is  at 
one  with  them  in  regarding  the  '  horns '  as  kings  of  the  Greek 
empire.  In  the  Sibj'llines  'the  man  clad  with  a  purple  cloak'  is 
Antiochus  Epiphanes.  The  race,  which  Antiochus  Epiphanes 
wished  to  destroy,  was  that  of  his  brother  Seleucus  IV,  Philopator. 
But  the  son  of  the  latter,  Demetrius  I  (162-150  B.C.),  shall  put  to 
death  the  'one  root'  which  Antiochus  left,  i.e.  Antiochus  V, 
Eupator  (164-162  B.C.),  or,  in  the  words  of  the  Sibyl,  'shall  cut 
(him)  off  from  among  ten  horns.'  Demetrius  I  was  in  turn  slain 
by  '  the  side  shoot,'  i.  e.  Alexander  Balas,  who  claimed  to  be  a  son 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and  reigned  from  150  to  146  B.C.  He 
was  slain  by  Demetrius  II  and  Ptolemy  VI,  Philometor  (i  Mace, 
xi.  1-19),  and  not  by  the  former  and  Antiochus  VII  as  the 
Sib3'llines  state.  The  parasite  horn  is  Trypho,  who  had  his  ward 
Antiochus  VI  removed  and  reigned  in  his  stead  from  142  to  137  B.C. 
The  text  of  the  Sibyllines  is  not  free  from  corruption. 

Again,  4  Ezra  xii.  10-12  (a.d.  80-120),  which  interprets  the 
fourth  kingdom  of  the  Roman  empire,  quite  clearly  states  that 
this  interpretation  is  not  the  interpretation  which  the  angel  gave 
to  Daniel,  i.e.  that  which  identified  the  Greek  empire  with  the 
fourth  kingdom,  and  which  till  Rome  became  mistress  of  the  East 
had  been  the  accepted  one.  The  passage  in  Ezra  runs:  xii.  10 
'And  he  said  unto  me:  This  is  the  interpretation  of  the  vision 
which  thou  hast  seen,  11.  The  Eagle  whom  thou  sawest  come 
up  from  the  sea  is  the  fourth  kingdom,  which  appeared  in  vision 
to  thy  brother  Daniel,  12.  But  it  was  not  interpreted  unto  him  as 
I  now  interpret  it  unto  thee  or  have  interpreted  it.' 

This  interpretation  was  still  prevalent  in  the  third  century  a.d.  ; 
for  it  was  recognized  by  Porph3'r3'  a.d.  233-304),  and  in  the  fourth 
by  Ephrem  Syrus  (a.d.  300-350). 


Median 
empire. 


70  DANIEL  7.  2 

2  Daniel  spake  and  said,  I  saw  in  my  vision  by  night,  and, 

According,  therefore,  to  the  authentic  interpretation  of  Dan.  ii, 
vii,  and  viii  the  symbols  are  to  be  identified  as  follows : 

Chap.     ii.     The      vii.  The  four  beasts.  )  -d  u   1 

_j    .  •_  „  Babylonian 

great  image.  femnire 

The  golden  head  =  Lion  with  Eagle's  wings.  j       " 

Silverbreastand  =  Bear  with  three  ribs  in  its  mouth" 
arms  ( =  first  and  shorter  horn  of  ram 

in  viii). 

Brass  belly  and  =  Leopard    with    four    wings    (--)  p 

thighs.  second  and  higher  horn  of  ram  L 

^  ...V  ^  f  empire, 

in  viii).  I       *^ 

Iron    legs,    feet  =  Beast  with  iron  teeth  and  ten  horns  \ 
and  toes,  part-  among  which  arose  a  little  horn  [  ^       , 

ly  iron,  partly  (=  goat  with  one  horn  followed  ^         . 

clay.  by  four  horns  out  of  which  arose         " 

a  little  horn  in  viii).  / 

{b)  The  second  interpretation,  which  arose  on  the  failure  of  the 
first  and  identified  the  Roman  empire  with  the  fourth  kingdom, 
is  found  in  the  N.  T.  In  Rev.  xiii  the  first  monster,  which 
emerges  from  the  sea  with  seven  heads  and  ten  horns,  is  the 
Roman  empire.  Again,  in  the  '  Little  Apocalypse'  in  Mark  xiii 
( =  Matt,  xxiv  =  Luke  xxi),  the  author  of  this  Apocalypse  clearly 
regarded  Dan.  ix.  27,  xi.  31,  xii.  11  as  referring  to  the  Roman 
empire  (see  Mark  xiii.  14). 

If  we  turn  from  the  N.T.  to  early  Jewish  and  Christian  litera- 
ture, we  are  justified  in  supposing  that  the  author  of  the  Assump- 
tion of  Moses  (a.d.  7-3O;  interpreted  the  fourth  kingdom  of  Rome  ; 
for  in  viii-ix  of  this  work  there  is  an  account  of  the  calamities 
endured  under  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  That  is  in  the  past  so  far 
as  the  writer  is  concerned.  Then  as  regards  the  future,  he  predicts 
the  overthrow  of  Rome  by  Israel,  ix.  8. 
'  Then  thou,  O  Israel,  shalt  be  happy 

And  thou  shalt  mount  on  the  necks  and  wings  of  the  Eagle 
And  they  shall  be  endedf:' 
where  the  last  two  lines  should  probably  be  read  as  : 
'And  thou  shalt  go  up  against  the  Eagle 
And  its  necks  and  wings  shall  be  destroyed.' 
But,  however  this  may  be,  there  can  be   no  doubt   as   to    the 
passage  in  4   Ezra  xii.   11-12    {c.  a.d.  120)    where   the    writer 
clearly  implies  that  the  angel  in  Dan.  vii.   17-19,  23  sqq.   mis- 
interpreted Daniel's  vision  by  identifying  the  Greek  empire  with 
the  fourth  beast.     The  same  view  is  to  be  found  in  Ep.  Barn.  iv. 
4-5  {c.  A.D.  100-120),  and  in  Hippolytus  (c,  a.d.  220),  and  in  the 
Talmud —Aboda  Zara  r^ 


DANIEL  7.  2  71 

behold,  the  four  winds  of  the  heaven  brake  forth  upon 

Some  modern  scholars  have  advocated  this  view,  but  it  is  wholly 
untenable.  The  former  view  is  now  accepted  practically  by  the 
whole  world  of  scholarship. 

2*^.  the  ten  horns.  The  '  ten  horns '  represent  ten  kings  (cf. 
ver.  24),  and  not  ten  kingdoms  as  in  viii.  8,  where  the  ^  four 
horns  '  stand  for  four  kingdoms.  Now,  since  after  these  ten  horns 
there  arises  another  horn,  the  'little  horn,'  and  since  this  little 
horn  is  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  it  follows  that  the  ten  preceding  horns 
are  kings.  But  owing  to  the  paucity  of  our  information  it  has 
not  yet  been  determined  definitely  who  these  ten  kings  are.  They 
have  been  taken  to  represent  the  successors  of  Alexander  by 
many  scholars  ;  and  so  we  have  (i)  Seleucus  I,  Nicator  (312-280 
B.C.)  :  (2)  Antiochus  I,  Soter  (279-261)  :  (3'  Antiochus  II,  Theos 
(261-246)  :  (4)  Seleucus  II,  Callinicus  (246-226) :  (5)  Seleucus  III, 
Ceraunus  ^226-223  :  ^6  Antiochus  III,  the  Great  (222  187)  :  (7) 
Seleucus  IV,  Philopator  ^186-176):  (8)  Heliodorus  :  (9,  Plolemy 
VII,  Philometor  (182-146):  (10)  Demetrius  I,  Soter.  These  last 
ihree  had  all  stood  in  the  way  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  and  had 
either  directly  or  indirectly  suffered  at  his  hands  in  his  efforts 
to  secure  the  throne  and  establish  his  power.  But  as  Hitzig, 
Kuenen,  Bevan,  and  others  urge,  the  list  should  begin  with 
Alexander,  since  the  fourth  beast  represents  the  Greek  supremacy. 
Hence  they  begin  the  list  with  Alexander  the  Great  and  reckon 
the  last  three  as  (8)  Seleucus  IV,  Philopator  :  (9)  Heliodorus : 
(10)  Demetrius  I,  Soter. 

3°.  the  three  horns  plucked  up.  Of  the  ten  horns  three  were 
to  be  'plucked  up'  (ver.  8),  overthrown  (ver.  26),  or  'put 
down '  (ver.  24^,  by  the  eleventh  horn,  i.  e.  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 
These  were  most  probably  the  last  three  in  the  list  of  ten  just  given. 

Antiochus  Epiphanes  would  appear  to  the  Jews,  as  may  be 
inferred  from  our  text,  to  have  instigated  the  removal  of  Seleucus 
Philometor  by  Heliodorus.  The  latter,  we  know,  he  crushed 
through  the  help  of  his  friends  Attains  and  Eumenes  of  Pergamum. 
The  grounds  are  less  cogent  with  regard  to  Demetiius  Soter.  It 
is  true  that  he  was  the  rightful  heir  of  the  kingdom,  but  he  was 
kept  out  of  his  inheritance  by  Antiochus.  He  could  hardly, 
therefore,  be  said  to  have  reigned  before  Antiochus  or  to  have 
been  slain  by  him.  On  these  grounds,  it  has  been  objected  that 
Demetrius  Soter  cannot  be  rightly  included  in  the  above  list. 
Instead  of  Demetrius  Soter  as  the  tenth  king  it  has  been  suggested 
by  von  Gutschmidt  that  the  last  of  the  three  horns  was  not  this 
Demetrius  but  a  brother  of  his,  who  was  executed  by  the  orders 
of  Antiochus  according  to  John  of  Antioch  (Muller,  Frag.  Hist. 
Grace.,  iv.  558,  quoted  by  Bevan).  If  we  accept  this  suggestion 
the  last  three  princes  satisfy  fairly  the  conditions  of  the  problem. 


7a  DANIEL  7.  3,  4 

3  the  great  sea.     And  four  great  beasts  came  up  from  the 

4  sea,  diverse  one  from  another.     The  first  was  hke  a  Hon, 

vii.  1.  In  the  first  year  of  Belshazzar.  The  historical  narra- 
tives are  now  at  an  end  and  a  series  of  visions  begins  herewith. 
The  first  of  these  goes  back  to  a  date  earlier  than  that  of  chap.  v. 

had.     Literally  '  saw '  as  in  marg. 

then  he  wrote  the  dream.  From  ver.  a  onwards  through- 
out the  book  Daniel  speaks  in  the  first  person  unless  in  x.  i. 

told  the  snm  of  the  matters.  .  .  .  spake  and  said.  These 
words  may  be  a  gloss.  They  are  omitted  by  Theodotion  :  their 
omission  restores  the  text  to  order.  From  the  preceding  words 
we  learn  that  Daniel  wrote  down  his  visions.  We  are  therefore 
to  regard  what  follows  as  a  transcript  of  the  original  account  of 
his  visions.  But  the  words  told  .  .  .  said  represent  Daniel  as  Hot 
only  writing  an  account  of  his  visions  but  also  as  subsequently 
recounting  them  orally.  The  LXX  omits  with  Theodotion  saving 
the  clause  '  the  sum  of  the  matters.'  Instead,  therefore,  of  'he 
wrote  .  .  .  and  said '  we  should  probably  read  :  '  he  wrote  the 
dream  (and)  the  sum  of  matters,'  i.e.  a  summary  account  of  the 
vision. 

2-8.   The /our  beasts. 

2.  in  my  vision  by  night.  The  LXX,  Theod.  and  Pesh.  read 
as  in  vii.  7,  13  'in  the  visions  of  the  night.' 

four  winds  of  the  heaven.     Cf.  viii.  8,  xi.  4,  Zech.  ii.  6,  vi.  5. 

brake  forth  upon  the  great  sea.  So  the  R.V.,  but  this  would 
naturally  require  b?  or  a  before  sea  instead  of  *f.  Hence  Ldv}' 
and  Bevan  suggest  that  the  verb  should  be  taken  transitively 
as  in  the  Targums  :  '  stirred  up  the  great  sea.' 

the  great  sea.  This  is  usually  the  Mediterranean  (Joshua 
ix.  i).  But  not  improbably  it  has  a  mythological  meaning  here  : 
cf.  Isa.  li.  10,  Ps.  Ixxiv.  13  sq.  as  Marti  suggests. 

3.  oame  up  from  the  sea.     Cf.  Rev.  xiii.  i,  Ezra  xi.  i,  xiii.  3. 

4.  Babylon  is  compared  here  to  a  lion  in  regard  to  its  might 
(cf.  Jer.  xlix.  19,  1.  17),  and  to  an  eagle  because  of  its  swiftness 
(cf.  Jer.  xlix.  22,  Hab.  i.  8).  Its  distinguishing  characteristics 
belong  naturally  to  the  animal  world.  But  after  a  time  these 
animal  characteristics  disappear,  and  the  Babylonian  kingdom 
becomes  so  to  speak  humanized  in  the  person  of  its  head,  i.e. 
Nebuchadnezzar  ;  for  there  is  obviousl}'  an  allusion  here  to  the 
experiences  in  chap,  iv,  Nebuchadnezzar  being  here,  as  in  ii.  38, 
identified  with  the  kingdom  of  Babylon.  The  beast's  heart  (iv.  16) 
was  removed  from  him  and  his  understanding  restored  (iv.  34,  36), 
so  here  the  creature  that  represents  Babylon  receives  the  heart 
(i.e.  the  intelligence)  of  a  man,  and  like  him  is  made  to  stand 
upon  its  feet. 


DANIEL  7.  5-7  73 

and  had  eagle's  wings :   I  beheld  till  the  wings  thereof 
were  plucked,  and  it  was  lifted  up  from  the  earth,  and 
made  to  stand  upon  two  feet  as  a  man,  and  a  man's 
heart  was  given  to  it.     And  behold   another   beast,   a  5 
second,  like  to  a  bear,  and  ^it  was  raised  up  on  one 
side,  and  three  ribs  were  in  his  mouth  between  his  teeth : 
and  they  said  thus  unto  it.  Arise,   devour  much  flesh. 
After  this  I  beheld,  and  lo  another,  like  a  leopard,  which  6 
had  upon  the  back  of  it  four  wings  of  a  fowl ;    the  beast 
had  also  four  heads ;    and  dominion  was  given  to  it. 
After  this  I  saw  in  the  night  visions,  and  behold  a  fourth  7 
beast,  terrible  and  ^powerful,  and  strong  exceedingly; 

*  Or,  as  otherwise  read,  it  raised  up  one  dominion 
^  Or,  dreadful 


It  must  be  confessed  that  the  above  explanation  is  rather  forced, 
but  this  is  owing  to  the  combination  of  two  really  incongruous  sets 
of  ideas, 

5.  The  Median  Empire  appears  in  the  form  of  a  bear.  As  the 
bear  is  inferior  in  strength  to  the  lion,  so  the  Median  Empire  was 
inferior  to  that  of  Babylon  (ii.  39). 

another  ...  a  second.  One  or  other  of  these  two  words  is 
a  gloss.  The  former  is  omitted  by  Theod.  and  the  Pesh. :  the 
latter  by  the  LXX  and  the  Vulgate.  The  text  in  verse  6  supports 
the  LXX  and  Vulgate. 

it  was  raised  np  on  one  side.  So  some  MSS.,  LXX,  and 
Theod.  The  Massoretic  reads  'it  had  raised  up  one  side.'  The 
difference  is  immaterial  so  far  as  the  meaning  goes,  which  is  far 
from  obvious.  Perhaps  the  words  point  to  its  inferiority  in  respect 
to  the  first  kingdom  (ii.  39). 

three  ribs  were  in  his  mouth.  These  words  may  point  to 
the  ravenous  nature  of  the  beast — an  idea  suggested  (Bevan)  by 
those  passages  of  the  prophets  in  which  the  Medes  are  summoned 
to  ravage  Babylon  (Isa.  xiii.  17,  Jer.  Ii.  ir,  28). 

they  said.     Simply  an  Aramaism  equivalent  to  *  it  was  said.' 

6.  upon  the  back  of  it.  Rather  *  on  its  sides.'  The  four  wings 
are  regarded  as  indicating  the  might  of  the  Persian  Empire  as 
extending  to  the  four  quarters  of  the  earth,  and  the  four  heads  as 
symbolizing  the  four  Persian  kings  (xi.  a). 

7-8.    The  fourth  beast,  i.e.  the  Gretk  Empire. 


74  DANIEL  7.  f?,  9 

and  it  had  great  iron  teeth :  it  devoured  and  brake  in 
pieces,  and  stamped  the  residue  with  his  feet :  and  it 
was  diverse  from  all  the  beasts  that  were  before  it ;    and 

8  it  had  ten  horns.  I  considered  the  horns,  and,  behold, 
there  came  up  among  them  another  horn,  a  little  one, 
before  which  three  of  the  first  horns  were  plucked  up  by 
the  roots :    and,  behold,  in  this  horn  were  eyes  like  the 

9  eyes  of  a  man,  and  a  mouth  speaking  great  things.    I  be- 

7.  it  was  diverse  from  all,  &c.  These  words  give  the  impres- 
sion created  in  the  oriental  mind  by  the  conquests  of  Alexander. 
While  the  preceding  empires  had  left  local  customs  untouched, 
the  Greek  Empire  overthrew  the  older  civilization  and  transformed 
it  radically.  It  did  its  task  with  thoroughness  :  *  it  devoured  and 
brake  in  pieces,  and  crushed  the  residue  with  its  feet.' 

it  had  ten  horns.  These  are  ten  kings — most  probably 
successors  of  Alexander  on  the  throne  of  Antioch.  See  Introd. 
to  this  chapter.  For  the  horn  used  as  a  symbol  of  a  king,  cf.  verse 
24,  viii.  5,  8%  9,  21,  I  Enoch  xc.  9,  or  a  dynasty  of  kings  viii.  3,  6, 
7,  8^  20,  22. 

8.  another  horn,  a  little  one.  Cf.  viii.  9.  The  *  little  horn ' 
is  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  He  was  'little*  to  begin  with,  but  soon 
achieved  such  power  that  three  of  the  first  horns  were  overthrown 
by  him.     Antiochus  was  not  the  lawful  heir  (xi.  21). 

three  of  the  first  horns.  These  were  most  probably  i^. 
Seleucus  IV  (Philopator\  who  was  murdered  by  his  minister 
Heliodorus  ;  2°.  Heliodorus,  who  soon  after  his  usurpation  was 
overthrown  by  Attains  and  Eumenesof  Pergamum  ;  3'*.  Demetrius 
I  (Soter),  who  was  the  son  and  lawful  heir  of  Seleucus  IV  (Philo- 
pator).     But  see  Introd.  to  this  chapter. 

eyes  like  the  eyes  of  a  man.  These  imply  the  faculty  of 
keen  observation  and  therefore  of  intelligence.     Cf.  viii.  23. 

a  mouth  speaking"  g'reat  thingfs.  Cf.  Ps.  xii.  3,  '  the  tongue 
that  speaketh  great  things,'  Obad.  12,  Rev.  xiii.  5.  These  words 
are  very  suitable  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  who  was  to  'speak 
marvellous  things  against  the  God  of  gods'  (xi.  36).  Cf.  i  Mace, 
i.  24,  where  it  is  said  that  after  robbing  the  Temple  of  all  its 
treasures  he  'spake  very  presumptuously.'  His  conduct  is  de- 
scribed in  analogous  terms  in  2  Mace.  v.  17,  21. 

and  he  made  war  with  the  saints.  These  words  should  be 
added  to  verse  8,  with  the  LXX.  This  forms  the  crowning  sin  of 
the  little  horn,  and  the  context  requires  it.  Besides  it  is  found  in  the 
like  contexts  in  verses  21,  25.  On  the  violent  measures  taken  by 
Antiochus  Epiphanes  against  the  Jews,  cf.  25,  viii.  10-14,  24-25. 


DANIEL  7.  9  75 

held  till  thrones  were  "  placed,  and  one  that  was  ancient 

*  Or.  cast  down 

9-14.  Divine  judgement  of  the  heathen  poivers.  As  in  1-8  Daniel 
saw  on  the  earth  in  a  vision  of  the  first  year  of  Belshazzar  the 
four  kingdoms  that  would  successively  hold  the  world  in  thrall,  so 
here  at  their  close  his  vision  is  carried  from  earth  to  heaven  and 
he  learns  in  the  final  judgement  of  God  the  right  explanation  of 
the  course  of  the  world's  empires  and  their  history.  At  this 
judgement  which  he  foresees  in  his  vision  the  thrones  were  set  for 
the  heavenly  powers,  the  assessors  of  the  Judge,  and  the  Almighty 
Himself  appeared  seated  on  a  throne  of  fire  and  encompassed  with 
myriads  of  angelic  beings.  The  books  were  opened,  and  the  fourth 
beast  was  slain  because  of  the  horn  that  spoke  great  things,  and 
the  other  three  beasts  had  their  dominion  taken  away.  Then 
there  came  in  the  clouds  of  heaven  a  being  like  a  son  of  man,  and 
to  him  was  given  an  everlasting  dominion  and  a  kingdom  that 
should  not  pass  away. 

9-10.  We  have  here  two  stanzas  of  three  lines  each. 

9.  thrones  were  placed:  i.e.  for  the  angelic  assessors.  On 
the  expression  cf.  Ps.  cxxii.  5,  '  thrones  for  judgement.'  Here, 
as  in  iv.  17,  the  heavenly  powers  take  part  with  God  in  the 
judgement. 

one  that  was  ancient  of  days :  lit.  'one  aged  in  days.'  This 
means  simply  an  aged  being.  The  same  expression,  as  Driver 
points  out,  occurs  in  the  Syriac  version  of  Wisdom  ii.  10  for  '  an 
old  man '  and  in  Sir.  xxv.  4  for  '  elders.'  The  Hebrew  equivalent 
occurs  in  Gen.  xxiv.  i.  Marti  compares  it  with  the  expressions  '  the 
first  and  the  last,'  Isa.  xliv.  6,  'He  that  sitteth  (enthroned)  of 
old,'  Ps.  Iv.  19,  and  'the  Eternal  One,'  i  Bar.  iv.  10, 14,  20.  But  there 
is  no  element  of  eternity  in  the  phrase  in  our  text.  Hence  it  is 
an  extraordinary  expression  to  apply  to  God,  and  accordingly 
if  we  take  into  account  the  fact  that  throughout  this  and  all  other 
Jewish  apocalypses  every  reference  to  or  description  of  God  is 
couched  in  terms  of  the  utmost  reverence,  we  must  find  it  difficult 
to  accept  the  phrase  as  original  in  its  present  form.  If  this  is  so 
it  is  not  improbable  that  instead  of  '  one  aged  in  days'  the  text 
originally  read  'one  like  an  aged  being'  or  '  man.'  This  would  be 
the  true  apocalyptic  form  of  expression,  resembling  that  in  Ezek. 
i.  26,  where  the  exceeding  reverence  of  the  seer's  words  should 
be  observed.  I,  therefore,  suggest  that  K^^'attik yomin  =  'one  like 
an  aged  being'  was  an  apocal^'ptic  designation  of  God  in  Aramaic. 
When  this  designation  was  once  accepted,  the  next  stage  in  its 
development  would  be  possible,  i.  e.  to  drop  the  comparative 
particle  and  therewith  the  apocalyptic  form  of  the  expression  and 
transform  the  indefinite  expression  into  a  definite  :  i.  e.  instead  of 

I 


76  DANIEL  7.  lo 

of  days  did  sit :   his  raiment  was  white  as  snow,  and  the 

hair  of  his  head  like  pure  wool;   his  throne  was  fiery 

10  flames,  and  the  wheels  thereof  burning  fire.     A  fiery 

*  like  an  aged  being '  we  should  have  *  the  aged  being '  (vii.  13,  2a). 
We  have  an  exactly  similar  development  in  the  case  of 'like  a  son 
of  man  '  (Dan.  vii.  13)  and  'the  Son  of  Man  '  (i  Enoch  xlvi.  a,  &c.). 
The  latter  expression  has  no  meaning  apart  from  its  development 
out  of  'like  a  son  of  man.'  The  phrase  'an  aged  being'  denotes 
simply,  as  above  said,  an  old  man.  But  the  apocalyptic  phrase 
'like  an  aged  being'  affirms  at  once  a  likeness  and  an  unlikeness. 
The  likeness  consists  in  the  dignified  appearance  of  an  aged  man, 
the  unlikeness  in  the  fact  that  the  Being  so  described  is  not  a 
human  but  a  supernatural  being.  In  apocalyptic  visions,  where 
men  or  nations  are  symbolized  by  animals,  supernatural  beings  are 
symbolized  by  men. 

his  raiment  was  white  as  snow.  The  Massoretic  punctua- 
tion requires  '  his  raiment  was  as  white  snow.' 

the  hair  of  his  head  like  pure  wool.  The  suggestion  of  the 
context  is  that  the  hair  was  white.  Hence  unless  we  assume  that 
wool  is  white,  which  of  course  it  sometimes  is,  the  comparison  is 
not  a  good  one.  The  LXX  has  here  '  the  hair  of  his  head  was 
spotless  as  white  wool.'  This  reading  has  the  support  of  1  Enoch 
xlvi.  I,  Rev.  i.  14.  See  detailed  criticism  in  my  larger  Com- 
mentary. 

his  throne  was  flery  flames,  &c.  We  might  compare  i  Enoch 
xiv.  i8-2a  with  verses  9-10  of  our  text. 

*  And  I  looked  and  saw  therein  a  lofty  throne : 
Its  appearance  was  as  crystal, 
And  the  wheels  thereof  as  the  shining  sun, 
And  there  was  the  vision  of  cherubim. 

19  And  from  underneath  the  throne  came  streams  of  flaming 

fire 
So  that  I  could  not  look  thereon. 

20  And  the  Great  Glory  sat  thereon 

And  His  raiment  shone  more  brightly  than  the  sun, 
And  was  whiter  than  any  snow  .  .  . 
22  The  flaming  fire  was  round  about  Him, 
And  a  great  fire  stood  before  Him, 
And  none  around  could  draw  nigh  Him. 
Ten  thousand  times  ten  thousand  (stood)  before  Him, 
Yet  He  needed  no  counsellor.' 

the  wheels  thereof  burning'  fire.  Cf.  i  Enoch  xiv.  18 
quoted  above,  Ezek.  i.  15  sqq. 

10.  A  flery  stream  .  .  .  came  forth  f^om  before  him.    Cf.  Ps. 


DANIEL  7.  ri-13  77 

stream  issued  and  came  forth  from  before  him :  thousand 
thousands  ministered  unto  him,  and  ten  thousand  times 
ten  thousand  stood  before  him  :    the  judgement  was  set, 
and   the  books  were   opened.     I   beheld   at   that  time  n 
because  of  the  voice  of  the  great  words  which  the  horn 
spake ;  I  beheld  even  till  the  beast  was  slain,  and  his 
body  destroyed,  and  he  was  given  ^  to  be  burned  with 
fire.     And  as  for  the  rest  of  the  beasts,  their  dominion  12 
was  taken  away :    yet  their  lives  were  prolonged  for  a 
season  and  a  time.     I  saw  in  the  night  visions,  and,  13 
*  Aram,  to  the  burning  of  fire. 

xcvii.  3,  'a  fire  goeth  before  Him,'  also  1.  3.  On  'from  before' 
see  note  on  vi.  10. 

thousand  thousands,  &c.  Cf.  Deut.  xxxiii.  2,  i  Enoch  i.  9, 
xiv.  22,  xl.  I,  Ixxi.  8,  13,  Jude  14,  15. 

stood  before:  i.e.  were  in  attendance. 

the  judgement  was  set.  *  The  judgement  nere  ^  those  who 
judge,  just  as  in  Jer.  xxiii.  18,  Ps.  Ixxxix.  7  'council'  (i.  e.  sod)^ 
•those  who  deliberate'  (Bevan). 

the  books  were  opened.  Cf.  Exod.  xxxii.  32  sq. ,  Ps.  Ixix. 
28,  Isa.  iv.  3,  I  Enoch  xlvii.  3  (where  see  full  note  on  this  subject), 
Jubilees  xxx.  20  sqq.,  Luke  x.  20,  Hebrews  xii.  23,  Rev.  iii.  5, 
XX,  12. 

11.  The  fourth  beast  is  destroyed  once  and  for  all,  because  of 
the  blasphemies  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (ver.  8)  ;  for  then  the 
guilt  had  become  full  (viii.  23). 

I  beheld  2*^.  This  repetition  is  uncalled  for.  It  is  probably 
a  gloss,  for  it  is  omitted  by  Theod.  and  also  by  the  LXX  as  we 
learn  from  the  Hexaplaric  Syriac. 

he  was  given  to  be  burned  with  fire.  This  is  the  final 
place  of  punishment — a  place  of  fire  as  i  Enoch  x.  6,  xviii.  11, 
xxi.  7-10,  where  the  fallen  angels  were  cast.  These  passages  are 
older  than  our  text.  In  xc.  24-27,  which  may  have  been  written 
contemporaneously  with  our  text,  the  same  place  of  torment  is 
referred  to. 

12.  The  three  remaining  beasts  are  not  destroyed  forthwith  as 
the  fourth  beast.  These  heathen  powers  survive  the  loss  of  their 
dominion,  as  nations,  not  as  kingdoms.  In  chapter  ii  the  four 
kingdoms  are  destroyed  simultaneously. 

13-14.  These  verses  form  a  stanza  of  six  lines.  Verse  13 
consists  of  a  distich  of  two  double  lines,  verse  14  is  a  tetrastich  : 

I   2 


78  DANIEL  7.  14 

behold,  there  came  with  the  clouds  of  heaven  one  like 
unto  a  son  of  man,  and  he  came  even  to  the  ancient  of 
14  days,  and  they  brought  him  near  before  him.  And  there 
was  given  him  dominion,  and  glory,  and  a  kingdom,  that 
all  the  peoples,  nations,  and  languages  should  serve  him  : 
his  dominion  is  an  everlasting  dominion,  which  shall  not 
pass  away,  and  his  kingdom  that  which  shall  not  be 
destroyed. 


'  And  there  was  given  him  dominion,  and  glory,  and  a  kingdom, 
That  all  the  peoples,  nations,  and  languages  should  serve  him  : 
His  dominion  is  an  everlasting  dominion,  which  shall  not  pass 

away, 
And  his  kingdom  that  which  shall  not  be  destroyed.' 

came  with  the  clouds  of  heaven.  See  following  note.  Cf. 
Mark  xiii.  26,  xiv.  62,  Rev.  i.  7,  xiv.  14,  15,  16.  Owing  to  this 
verse  the  Messiah  was  sometimes  designated  '  the  Cloud  Man.' 

like  unto  a  son  of  man.  In  apocalyptic  visions,  where  men 
are  symbolized  by  beasts,  angels  and  supernatural  beings  are 
symbolized  by  men.  This  symbolism  will  be  found  on  a  large 
scale  in  i  Enoch  Ixxxix-xc.  If,  therefore,  the  expression  is  to  be 
taken  strictly,  it  undoubtedly  suggests  a  supernatural  being,  or 
a  body  of  such  beings.  Since  the  beings  thus  referred  to  are, 
according  to  the  interpretation  of  the  angel,  the  people  of  the 
saints  of  the  Most  High  (verses  18,  22,  27),  we  are  to  infer  that 
the  faithful  remnant  of  Israel  are  to  be  transformed  into  heavenly 
or  supernatural  beings,  as  in  i  Enoch  xc.  38  (i6r  b.  c),  and  in 
later  apocalypses,  which  expect  an  everlasting  kingdom  upon 
earth. 

That  this  is  the  meaning  of  the  words  is  clear  from  the  clause 
that  follows,  'came  with  the  clouds  of  heaven.'  This  clause 
undoubtedly  implies  superhuman  authority  and  state. 

How  this  passage  gave  risesubsequently  to  the  Messianic  designa- 
tion can  readilj'  be  understood  from  what  precedes.  The  writer  of 
the  Parables  of  Enoch  (i  Enoch  xxxvii-Ixxi)  was  the  first  student  of 
Daniel  vii,  so  far  as  existing  literature  goes,  to  interpret  *  one  like 
a  son  of  man  '  in  this  passage  as  relating  to  an  individual.  The 
moment  he  did  so,  he  rose  to  the  conception  of  a  superhuman 
Messiah,  while  following  the  natural  method  of  interpreting  the 
vision. 

the  ancient  of  days.     See  verse  9,  note. 

they  brought  him.  This  expression  in  Aramaic  is  simply 
equivalent  to  the  passive  :  '  he  was  brought,'  as  in  verse  5. 


DANIEL  7.  15-18  79 

As  for  me  Daniel,  my  spirit  was  grieved  in  the  midst  15 
of  '^my  body,  and  tiie  visions  of  my  head  troubled  me. 
I  came  near  unto  one  of  them  that  stood  by,  and  asked  [6 
him  the  truth  concerning  all  this.     So  he  told  me,  and 
made  me  know  the  interpretation  of  the  things.     These  17 
great  beasts,  which  are  four,  are  four  kings,  which  shall 
arise  out  of  the  earth.     But  the  saints  of  the  Most  High  ig 
*  Aram,  the  sheath. 


15-28.    The  interpretation  of  the  vision. 

15.  in  the  midst  of  my  body:  lit.  'in  the  midst  of  the  (or 
"its")  sheath.'  The  original  n;i:  ui  is  generally  regarded  as 
corrupt  for  r^y^  p2,  '  on  account  of  these  things.'  The  LXX  reads 
kv  rovTois,  which  supports  the  above  restoration. 

16.  one  of  them  that  stood  by.  This  is  taken  to  mean  one  of 
the  angels  in  attendance  on  God  (ver.  13).  This  angel  gives  at 
first  a  short  and  summary  answer  (17-18),  and  afterwards  a  full 
interpretation  in  answer  to  Daniel's  request  for  further  information. 
In  the  visions  of  the  earlier  prophets  God  Himself  spake  to  the 
prophet  (Amos  vii,  viii,  Isa.  vi,  Jer.  i,  &c.),  but  in  Zech.  i.  7-vi.  8, 
Daniel,  i  Enoch,  Test,  xii  Patriarchs,  Jubilees,  2  Baruch,  4  Ezra, 
the  part  of  the  interpreter  is  discharged  by  an  angel.  In  Ezek. 
xl-xlviii  we  have  a  combination  of  both  methods,  and  this  section 
accordingly  marks  the  period  of  transition  from  one  method  to  the 
other. 

17-18.  The  angel's  reply  forms  a  tetrastich. 

17.  These  great  beasts,  which  are  four,  &c.  The  words 'which 
are  four '  are  omitted  by  the  LXX.  They  are  certainly  unneces- 
sary ;  for  the  seer  knows  perfectly  well  the  number  of  the  king- 
doms. But  further  the  words  'shall  arise  out  of  the  earth'  are 
certainly  corrupt.  According  to  vii.  3  they  arise  out  of  the  sea  : 
cf.  Rev.  xiii.  i,  4  Ezra  xi.  i.  By  a  careful  stud}'  of  the  LXX  and 
Thcod.  we  arrive  at  the  following  text :  *  these  great  beasts  are 
four  kingdoms,  which  shall  be  destroyed  from  the  earth.'  See 
my  larger  Commentary. 

kings.     The  word  here  stands  for  '  kingdoms.' 

18.  the  saints  .  .  .  shall  receive  the  king'dom :  i.  e.  from 
God.  Cf.  verse  27.  Though  the  phrase  '  kingdom  of  God  '  is  not 
found  in  Daniel,  yet  we  have  here  substantially  the  thought  for 
which  it  stands.  Furthermore  the  thought  here  is  not  '  the 
divine  sovereignty' — the  meaning  now  all  but  universally  given  to 
this  phrase  'kingdom  of  God'  in  the  N.T.  and  in  Rabbinic 
writings,  but  'a  divinely  organized  community.'  This  is  clear 
also  from  verse  14. 


8o  DANIEL  7.  19-2 a 

shall  receive  the  kingdom,  and  possess  the  kingdom  for 

19  ever,  even  for  ever  and  ever.  Then  I  desired  to  know 
the  truth  concerning  the  fourth  beast,  which  was  diverse 
from  all  of  them,  exceeding  terrible,  whose  teeth  were  of 
iron,  and  his  nails  of  brass ;  which  devoured,  brake  in 

20  pieces,  and  stamped  the  residue  with  his  feet ;  and  con- 
cerning the  ten  horns  that  were  on  his  head,  and  the 
other  horn  which  came  up,  and  before  which  three  fell ; 
even  that  horn  that  had  eyes,  and  a  mouth  that  spake 
great  things,  whose  look  was  more  stout  than  his  fellows. 

21  I  beheld,  and  the  same  horn  made  war  with  the  saints, 

22  and  prevailed  against  them;  until  the  ancient  of  days 
came,  and  judgement  was  given  ^to  the  saints  of  the 
*  Ot.for 

Since  the  term  for  '  saints  '  (kaddishin)  here  is  used  specially  of 
angels  in  iv.  13  and  not  that  used  universally  in  the  Psalms  {hasid), 
it  is  clear  that  the  author  expressly  chose  this  term  in  order  to 
indicate  the  heavenly  origin  of  the  kingdom  and  its  members  as 
opposed  to  that  of  the  gentile  powers.  'The  saints  of  the  Most 
High'  (22%  25,  27)  are  spoken  of  simply  as  *  saints'  in  21,  22^. 
And  as  being  heavenly  in  its  origin  it  is  likewise  of  everlasting 
duration.  In  verse  14  the  sovereignty  of  the  saints  is  described  in 
terms  that  are  elsewhere  used  of  the  sovereignty  of  God  Himself : 
cf-  iv.  3,  34,  VI.  26. 

19-22.  DanieVs  request  for  further  information. 

19.  Cf.  verses  7-8. 

nails  of  brass:  not  mentioned  before. 

20.  even  that  horn  that  had  eyes  :  rather  •  and  as  regards 
that  horn,  it  had  eyes  and  a  mouth,'  &c. 

look   (or  'appearance')    was   more    stout,   &c.     The  small 
horn  (ver.  8)  grew  quickly  to  a  great  size  (viii.  9',. 

fli-a2.  A  recapitulation  of  8-12,  13-14.  The  only  addition  is 
the  clause  *  and  prevailed  against  them  '  ;  for  on  verse  8  it  has  been 
shown  that  the  clause  '  and  it  made  war  with  the  saints '  belonged 
originally  to  the  text  of  that  verse. 

21.  prevailed  against  them  :  till  the  intervention  of  the  Most 
High.     Cf.  next  verse. 

22.  the  ancient  of  days:  here  the  apocalyptic  form  of  the 
expression  (see  verse  9")  is  dropped  as  in  verse  13. 

judgfement  was  g'iven  to  (or  rather  '  for  '^  the  saints.     The 


DANIEL  7.  23-25  81 

Most  High ;  and  the  time  came  that  the  saints  possessed 
the  kingdom.     Thus  he  said,  The  fourth  beast  shall  be  23 
a  fourth  kingdom  upon  earth,  which  shall  be  diverse  from 
all  the  kingdoms,  and  shall  devour  the  whole  earth,  and 
shall  «•  tread  it  down,  and  break  it  in  pieces.     And  as  for  24 
the  ten  horns,  out  of  this  kingdom  shall  ten  kings  arise : 
and  another  shall  arise  after  them  ;  and  he  shall  be  diverse 
from  the  former,  and  he  shall  put  down  three  kings. 
And  he  shall  speak  words  against  the  Most  High,  and  25 
shall  wear  out  the  saints  of  the  Most  High  :  and  he  shall 
think  to  change  the  times  and  the  law ;  and  they  shall 

*  Or,  thresh  it 

saints  do  not  judge,  but  God  alone  is  Judge.  Ewald,  followed  by 
most  scholars,  has  restored  n^td'^iti  nrr  before  :i-i\  Hence  we  should 
read  '  the  judgement  (was  set  and  dominion)  was  given  to  the 
saints.'     Cf.  vii.  lo^  14,  26,  27. 

the  time  came :  i.  e.  the  time  fixed  by  God  as  the  limit  of 
the  heathen  rule.     Cf.  Luke  xxi.  8  o  Kaipds  rjyyiicfv. 

23-27.  The  fuller  answer  of  the  angel  in  metrical  form.    Verse 
23  forms  a  tetrastich  with  an  initial  long  line. 

*The  fourth  beast  shall  be  a  fourth  kingdom  upon  earth, 
Which  shall  be  diverse  from  all  the  kingdoms, 
And  shall  devour  the  whole  earth,'  &c. 
Verse  24  forms  also  a  tetrastich  of  which  the  words  '  the  ten 
horns '  form  the  title.     Verse  25  is  also  a  tetrastich.     See  in  he. 
Verse  26  is  a  tristich,  while  verse  27  seems  to  be  composed  of  two 
tristichs  (Marti). 

24.    The  ten  horns  are  ten  kings. 

he  shall  be  diverse,  &c.  :  the  eleventh  king  shall  be  diverse 
from  the  ten  not  only  in  removing  his  three  predecessors  but  in 
his  blasphemies  against  the  Most  High  and  his  persecution  of  the 
saints. 
25.  'And  he  shall  speak  words  against  the  Most  High, 
And  shall  wear  out  the  saints  of  the  Most  High  : 
And  he  shall  think  to  change  the  times  and  the  law, 
And  they  shall  be  given,'  &c. 

wear  out  (or  'away')  :  cf.  Isa.  iii.  15,  i  Chron.  xvii.  9. 

the  times  and  the  law :  Antiochus  attempted  to  suppress 
the  religious  festivals  of  the  Jews  and  the  law  :  cf.  i  Mace.  i.  44- 
49.  'Times'  here  are  set  times  for  religious  observances,  like 
Church  seasons. 


Sa  DANIEL  7.  26-38—8.  I 

be  given  into  his  hand  until  a  time  and  times  and  half 

26  a  time.  But  the  judgement  shall  sit,  and  they  shall  take 
away  his  dominion,  to  consume  and  to  destroy  it  unto 

27  the  end.  And  the  kingdom  and  the  dominion,  and  the 
greatness  of  the  kingdoms  under  the  whole  heaven,  shall 
be  given  to  the  people  of  the  saints  of  the  Most  High : 
his  kingdom  is  an  everlasting  kingdom,  and  all  dominions 

28  shall  serve  and  obey  him.  ^  Here  is  the  end  of  the 
matter.  As  for  me  Daniel,  my  thoughts  much  troubled 
me,  and  my  ^  countenance  was  changed  in  me :  but 
I  kept  the  matter  in  my  heart. 

8      In  the  third  year  of  the  reign  of  king  Belshazzar  a 
*  Aram.  Hitherto.         ^  Aram,  brightness. 


a  time  and  times  and  half  a  time :  a  '  time '  here  means 
a  year.  See  iv.  16  note.  Hence  this  period  during  which  the 
Jewish  religion  was  to  be  suppressed  was  three  and  a  half  years. 
This  was  the  traditional  limit  assigned  to  the  kingdom  of  the 
Antichrist.  Here  this  period  begins  in  168  and  terminates  in 
165  B.  c.     See  note  on  viii.  14. 

26-27.  At  the  close  of  the  three  and  a  half  years  the  judgement 
will  take  place,  and  the  kingdom  of  the  saints  be  established, 
which  embraces  every  country  under  heaven  and  not  merely  the 
fourth  kingdom. 

26.  judgement  shall  sit:  cf  10'^,  11'^,  22, 

they  shall  take  away  his  dominion  :  an  Aramaism  for  '  his 
dominion  shall  be  taken  away.'  The  R.V.  should  have  used  the 
passive  here  as  they  have  done  in  verse  12. 

unto  the  end :  cf.  vi.  a6. 

27.  his  kingdom  .  .  .  obey  him.  Read  'its  kingdom  .  .  . 
obey  it.'     The  pronoun  refers  not  to  God  but  to  the  saints. 

28.  thoughts  .  .  .  troubled  me :  cf.  iv.  19,  v.  6,  10. 
changed    in    me.      Read    'changed   upon    me'   or  simply 

*  changed.' 

Z  kept  the  matter  in  my  heart:  cf,  LXX  iv.  25,  T.  Lev. 
vi.  2,  viii.  19,  Luke  ii.  19. 

Chap.  viii.  The  vision  of  the  victory  of  the  Greek  over  the 
Median  and  Persian  Empires,  and  of  the  persecution  of  the 
Jews,  and  the  suspension  of  the  Temple  worship  by  Antiochus 
Epiphanes. 


DANIEL  8.  3  83 

vision  appeared  unto  me,  even  unto  me  Daniel,  after 
that  which  appeared  unto  me  at  the  first.     And  I  saw  in  2 
the  vision ;  now  it  was  so,  that  when  I  saw,   I  was  in 
Shushan  the  ^  palace,  which  is  in  the  province  of  Elam  ; 
and  I  saw  in  the  vision,  and  I  was  by  the  river  Ulai. 

*  Or,  castle 

The  aim  of  this  chapter  is  to  give  fuller  disclosures  concerning 
those  parts  of  the  vision  in  chapter  vii  with  which  our  author  is 
mainly  concerned.  Although  the  vision  is  dated  from  the  third  year 
of  Belshazzar  it  contains  no  reference  to  the  Babylonian  Empire. 
The  two  Empires  of  Media  and  Persia  are  represented  under 
a  single  figure  and  dismissed  in  a  few  clauses  in  order  the  more 
speedily  to  deal  with  his  main  subject,  the  Empire  of  the  Greeks. 
After  recounting  briefly  the  conquests  of  Alexander  (5-8),  he 
hastens  on  to  relate  the  history  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  his  per- 
secution of  the  Jews,  and  his  suspension  of  the  worship  in  the 
Temple. 

1.  In  the  tliird  year.     See  vii.  i  note, 
at  the  first :  i.  e.  previously  as  in  vii. 

2.  The  seer  is  carried  in  a  vision  to  Shushan,  as  Ezekiel  was 
carried  to  Jerusalem,  Ezek.  viii.  3-xi.  24,  xl.  2sqq. 

Shushan  the  palace  Tor  R.V.  marg.  'castle').  This  is  the 
regular  description  of  Shushan  in  O.T.  :  Neh.  i.  i  ;  Esther  i.  2,  5, 
ii.  3,  5,  8,  &c.  The  word  for  '  castle '  or  '  citadel,'  i.  e.  bimh,  is  late 
Hebrew  from  the  Assyrio-Babylonian  bititi,  and  found  elsewhere 
only  in  i  Chron.  xxix.  i,  19,  Ezra  vi.  2,  Neh.  ii.  8,  vii.  2.  This 
citadel  of  Shushan,  i.  e.  Susa,  was  celebrated  in  ancient  times  for 
its  strength  (Herod,  v.  54\  It  is  distinguished  from,  the  city  in 
Esther  iii.  15.  Shushan  was  in  later  times  probably  the  capital  of 
Elam.  The  first  Susa  with  its  palace  was  destroyed  by  Assur- 
bani-pal  (668-626  b.c).  To  this  Susa  there  is  no  reference  in  the 
O.T.  It  was  refounded  by  Darius  Hystaspis  (521-485  B.C.),  and 
according  to  Xenophon  {Cyrop.  viii.  6.  22")  'was  the  winter 
residence  of  the  Persian  kings,  the  rest  of  the  year  being  spent 
by  them  at  Babylon  and  Ecbatana'  (see  Encyc.  Bib.  iv.  4499  sq.). 
It  would  appear,  therefore,  that,  during  the  period  to  which  our 
text  would  refer  the  reign  of  Belshazzar,  there  was  no  '  palace ' 
or  'citadel'  at  Susa,  and  that  the  city  itself  was  in  an  evil  con- 
dition, if  not  entirely  ruined. 

Elam.  Shushan  is  here  said  to  be  in  Elam,  but  in  Ezra  iv.  9 
it  seems  to  be  distinguished  from  it. 

the  river  Ulai.  The  word  for  'river,'  'ubal,  is  found  only 
here  and  in  3,  6.     It  is  a  phonetic  variation  ofyubal  in  Jer.  xvii.  8. 


84  DANIEL  8.  ?,-5 

3  Then  I  lifted  up  mine  eyes,  and  saw,  and,  behold,  there 
stood  before  the  river  a  ram  which  had  two  horns :  and 
the  two  horns  were  high  ;  but  one  was  higher  than  the 

4  other,  and  the  higher  came  up  last.  I  saw  the  ram 
pushing  westward,  and  northward,  and  southward;  and 
no  beasts  could  stand  before  him,  neither  was  there  any 
that  could  deliver  out  of  his  hand  ;  but  he  did  according 

5  to  his  will,  and  magnified  himself.  And  as  I  was  con- 
sidering, behold,  an  he-goat  came  from  the  west  over 


The  Ulai  is  the  Eulaeus  on  which,  according  to  Pliny  ^H.  N.  vi.  135), 
Susa  was  situated,  though  Herodotus  (i.  i88,  v.  49,  52'  places  it 
on  the  Choaspes.  Three  rivers  flow  from  the  north  near  Susa 
into  the  Persian  Gulf:  the  Kerkha  ( =  the  ancient  Choaspes)  ;  the 
Abdizful  (=  the  Coprates)  which  falls  into  the  Karun  (=the 
Pasitigris)  ;  and  the  Eulaeus,  'a  large  artificial  canal  .  .  .,  which 
left  the  Choaspes  at  Pai  Pul,  about  20  miles  N.W.  of  Susa,  passed 
close  by  the  town  of  Susa  on  the  N.  or  N.E.,  and  afterwards 
joined  the  Coprates  '  (Driver). 

3.  The  seer  beholds,  in  the  form  of  a  single  ram,  the  kingdoms 
of  Media  and  Persia,  the  ram  being  a  well-known  symbol  of  might 
and  dominion.  But  though  these  two  nations  can  thus  be  repre- 
sented by  one  animal,  since  they  are  regarded  as  akin  to  each 
other,  their  diversity  is  brought  forward.  The  ram  has  two 
horns  :  the  stronger  which  came  up  later  represents  Persia,  while 
the  earlier  and  weaker  stands  for  Media.  Cf.  ii.  39  for  a  like 
distinction. 

4.  The  eastern  conquests  of  the  Achaemenidae  were  of  no 
interest  to  the  Jew,  and  are  therefore  not  mentioned. 

according'  to  his  will:  i.e.  his  caprice.  Cf.  xi.  3,  16,  36, 
Esther  ix.  5. 

mag-nified  himself:  there  is  a  nuance  of  arrogance  and 
insolence  in  the  word  :  cf.  Ps.  Iv.  12,  Jer.  xlviii.  26. 

5-7.  An  he-goat  (=  the  Greek  Empire)  attacks  the  ram  and 
overcomes  it.  This  goat  had  a  notable  horn  between  its  eyes,  i.e. 
Alexander  the  Great  (verse  21). 

5.  an  he-g'oat.  The  Hebrew  here  reads  'the  he-goat,'  but 
the  two  Greek  versions  rightly  omit  the  definite  article.  If  the 
article  were  right  it  would  represent  the  '  he-goat '  as  well  known, 
although  appearing  now  for  the  first  time  in  the  vision.  The 
word  for  he-goat  is  late  Hebrew  (cf.  Ezra  viii.  35,  2  Chron.  xxix.  21), 
and  probably  borrowed  from  Aramaic.     As  a  symbol  of  a  chief  or 


DANIEL  8.  6-8  85 

the  face  of  the  whole  earth,  and  a  touched  not  the  ground  : 
and  the  goat  had  a  notable  horn  between  his  eyes.    And  6 
he  came  to  the  ram  that  had  the  two  horns,  which  I  saw 
standing  before  the  river,  and  ran  upon  him  in  the  fury 
of  his  power.     And  I  saw  him  come  close  unto  the  ram,  7 
and  he  was  moved  with  choler  against  him,  and  smote 
the  ram,  and  brake  his  two  horns ;    and  there  was  no 
power  in  the  ram  to  stand  before  him  :  but  he  cast  him 
down  to  the  ground,  and  trampled  upon  him  ;  and  there 
was  none  that  could  deliver  the  rani  out  of  his  hand. 
And  the   he-goat  magnified   himself  exceedingly :    and  8 
when  he  was  strong,  the  great  horn  was  broken ;    and 
instead  of  it  there  came  up  four  notable  /lorm  toward 
•^  Heb.  tione  touched  the  ground. 


ruler  the  term  '  he-goat '  is  to  be  found  in  Isa.  xiv.  9,  xxxiv.  6,  but 
it  is  the  classical  Hebrew  word  that  is  used  there. 

touched  not  the  ground:  i.  e.  without  touching  the  ground. 
To  arrive  at  this  rendering  a  slight  change  in  the  text  (which  is 
really  translated  in  the  margin)  is  needed. 

a  notable  horn:  lit. '  a  horn  of  conspicuousness.'  Cf.  some- 
what analogous  expressions  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  21,  *a  goodl3'  man' 
(lit.  'a  man  of  appearance'),  i  Chron.  xi.  23.  This  horn  is 
described  as  a  'great '  one  in  viii.  8,  21. 

This  '■  notable  horn '  is  Alexander  the  Great,  who  crossed  the 
Hellespont  in  334  B.C.,  overthrew  Darius  Codomannus  at  Issus 
i"  333>  traversed  Palestine,  reduced  Egypt,  and  finally  crushed 
Persia  at  Arbela  in  331.  After  further  victorious  campaigns  in 
the  far  East  and  in  India,  he  died  of  fever  in  323  B.C. 

6-7.    The  complete  overthrow  of  Persia  by  Alexander. 

7.  trampled:  cf.  vii.  7,  19,  where  however,  a  verb  from  a 
different  Semitic  root  is  used. 

8.  Death  of  Alexander  and  the  division  of  his  empire  into  four 
kingdoms.     Cf.  xi.  4. 

fonr  notable  horns  :  lit.  conspicuousness  of  four.'  This  is 
supposed  to  mean  '  four  conspicuous  ones.'  Though  this  expres- 
sion differs  from  that  in  verse  5,  the  same  meaning  must  perforce 
be  attached  to  it.  But  the  context  hardly  justifies  such  a  meaning. 
According   to   verse  22,  the  four  kingdoms   were  not  '  notable.' 


86  DANIEL  8.  9, 10 

9  the  four  winds  of  heaven.  And  out  of  one  of  them  came 
forth  a  little  horn,  which  waxed  exceeding  great,  toward 
the  south,  and  toward  the  east,  and  toward  the  glorious 

10  land.     And  it  waxed  great,  even  to  the  host  of  heaven ; 

Hence  we  should  follow  the  LXX,  and  with  Graetz  and  other 
scholars  read  P"nnK  instead  of  p'^trr,  i.  e.  '  four  other  ones.'  The 
corruption  could  arise  from  verse  5. 

On  the  death  of  Alexander  his  empire  became  the  cause  of 
endless  rivalries  and  wars  amongst  his  generals,  which  raged 
for  over  twenty  years  before  a  final  settlement  was  arrived  at 
through  the  battle  of  Ipsus  in  301.  By  this  settlement  Egypt  was 
confirmed  to  Ptolemy  in  the  south  ;  Asia  Minor  to  Paphlagonia 
and  Pontus  to  Lysimachus  in  the  north  ;  Seleucus  received  Syria, 
Babylonia,  and  other  eastern  provinces,  as  far  as  the  Indus  in  the 
east ;  and  Cassander  Macedonia,  and  Greece  in  the  west  These 
four  new  kingdoms  rose  on  the  ruins  of  Alexander's  empire,  and 
are  symbolized  by  the  '  four  horns.' 

9-14.  The  ^little  horn,''  i.  e.  Antiochus  IV  (Epiphanes),  175-164  B.C. 
Cf.  I  Mace.  i.  10,  Joseph.  Ant.  x.  xi.  7. 

9.  Our  author  passes  over  without  mention  all  the  Seleucidae 
from  301  to  1 75  B.C.  His  sole  concern  is  with  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
whom  he  regarded  as  the  last  and  greatest  enemy  of  the  Jews  and 
their  faith. 

a  little  horn.  These  words  are  not  a  rendering  of  the  text,, 
which,  if  it  is  Hebrew,  is  literall}'  'a  horn  from  being  little.'  But 
the  text  is  most  probably  corrupt  and  should  be  emended.  By 
omitting  one  letter  fvvith  Graetz)  we  arrive  at  the  usual  Hebrew 
for  'a  little  horn,'  or,  by  a  change  of  two  letters  (with  Bevan), 
we  get  '  another  horn  a  little  one.'  The  latter  is  most  probably 
right,  as  it  has  the  support  of  vii.  8.  The  two  Greek  versions 
presuppose  quite  a  different  adjective. 

toward  the  south:  i.e.  Egypt:  cf.  xi,  25  sqq.,  i  Mace, 
i.  16-19. 

toward  the  east :  i.  e.  Elymais  to  the  east  of  Bab3'lon, 
invaded  by  Antiochus  in  the  last  year  of  his  life:  cf.  i  Mace, 
i'i-  31,  37,  vi.  1-4. 

toward  the  glorious  land.  Cf.  xi.  16,  41.  In  Ezek.  xx. 
6,  15  Palestine  is  called  'the  glory  of  all  lands,'  in  Zech.  vii.  14 
'the  pleasant  land;'  in  i  Enoch  Ixxxix.  40  'a  pleasant  and 
glorious  land.'     Cf.  also  Jer.  iii.  19. 

10.  As  Bevan  remarks,  in  this  verse  *  the  relation  of  Antiochus 
to  the  Jews  is  more  clearly  defined.  Here,  as  in  chapter  xii,  the 
heavenly  character  of  Israel,  as  distinguished  from  the  nations  of 
the  earth,  is  specially  emphasized.    The  ''host  of  heaven"  repre- 


DANIEL  8.  11,12  87 

and  some  of  the  host  and  of  the  stars  it  cast  down  to  the 
ground,  and  trampled  upon  them.     Yea,  it  magnified  n 
itself,  even  to  the  prince  of  the  host ;  and  ^  it  took  away 
from  him  the  continual  hirnt  offerings  and  the  place  of 
his  sanctuary  was  cast  down.     And  ^the  host  was  given  12 

*  Another  reading  is,  tJie  continual  burnt  ofifering  was  taken 
away  from  hitn.  ^  Or,  an  host  was  given  to  it  against  the  ^c. 

Or,  an  host  was  set  over  the  &c. 

sents  the  people  of  God.'  Marti,  on  the  other  hand,  thinks  that 
the  casting  down  of  '  some  of  .  .  the  slars  '  is  a  symbolical  descrip- 
tion of  Antiochus'  attempt  to  put  down  all  the  native  religions 
in  the  countries  under  his  rule  and  to  substitute  the  religion  of 
Hellas.  But  in  i  Enoch  xlvi.  7  'the  stars  of  heaven'  denote  the 
righteous  Jews.  Elsewhere  'the  host  of  heaven'  in  the  O.T. 
means  the  stars  or  the  celestial  beings  in  attendance  on  God.  See 
Driver  in  Hastings'  D.B.,  ii.  429  sq. 

Our  text  refers  to  the  persecution  of  the  Jews  by  Antiochus 
and  possibly  to  the  murder  of  the  high  priest  Onias  HI,  who  is 
referred  to  more  definitely  in  i  Enoch  xc.  8. 

11-13.  These  verses  form  one  of  the  most  difficult  passages  in 
Daniel,  owing  to  the  corruptions  in  the  text.  It  is  possible  by 
means  of  the  Versions,  especially  the  LXX  and  Theodotion,  to 
recover  the  original  for  the  most  part.  Without  them  in  fact  this 
is  impossible.  But  the  present  work  does  not  admit  of  the  critical 
examination  of  these  Versions,  and  accordingly  we  shall  only  make 
a  partial  use  of  them  in  dealing  with  the  Massoretic  text. 

11.  prince  of  the  host:  i.  e.  God. 

took  away  from  hini.  Cf.  xi.  31.  The  Q^rt  (see  margin 
R.V.)  reads  'by  it  the  continual  burnt  offering  was  taken  away.' 
These  words  refer  to  Antiochus'  suspension  of  the  Temple 
services:  cf.  i  Mace.  i.  41-54,  59,  iv,  52. 

the  contimial  burnt  offering.  Cf.  xi.  31.  The  word  'burnt 
oftering '  is  not  expressed  here.  The  full  expression  {'dia/h 
tnmtd  is  found  in  Exod,  xxix.  42,  &c.,  but  owing  to  familiar 
use  it  came  to  be  spoken  of  simply  as  haitdtnld,  '  the  continual,' 
in  later  Judaism  in  the  Mishna,  as  it  is  in  Daniel,  but  not  else- 
where in  the  O.T. 

the  place  of  his  sancttiary  was  cast  down.  The  Temple 
was  not  destroyed  by  Antiochus,  but  it  was  '  laid  waste  '  (i  Mace. 
i.  39),  and  'trodden  under  foot'  (op.  cit.  vi.  45"^,  and  in  part  over- 
thrown {op.  cit.  iv.  48). 

12.  Text  corrupt. 

an  host  (R.  V.  marg.)  was  given  over  to  it,  &c.    This  is 


8S  DANIEL  8.  13,14 

over   /o  it  together  with  the   continual   bitrnt  offering 
through  transgression  ;   and  it  cast   down  truth  to  the 

13  ground,  and  it  did  its  pleasure  and  prospered.  Then 
I  heard  a  holy  one  speaking ;  and  another  holy  one  said 
unto  that  certain  one  which  spake,  How  long  shall  be 
the  vision  coficerni?ig  the  continual  burnt  offering,  and 
the  transgression  that  maketh  desolate,  to  give  both  the 

14  sanctuary  and  the  host  to  be  trodden  under  foot  ?    And 


said  to  mean  :  an  army  of  Israelites  were  given  over  into  the 
power  of  the  horn,  together  with  the  continual  burnt  offering, 
owing  to  the  apostasy  of  the  Hellenizing  Jews.  Driver  renders  : 
'  a  host  was  appointed  against  the  continual  burnt  offering  with 
transgression,'  i.  e.  Antiochus  had  recourse  to  violent  measures 
and  established  an  armed  garrison  in  Jerusalem  in  order  to  suppress 
the  sacred  rites  of  the  Jews.  Marti  and  von  Gall  omit  the  initial 
word  'host'  (wrongly  claiming  the  support  of  the  Greek  versions 
for  so  doing),  and  with  a  change  of  a  letter  arrive  at  the  following 
rendering  :  '  and  the  transgression  was  laid  on  the  continual  burnt 
offering,  and  truth  cast  to  the  ground,  and  it  did  and  prospered.' 
This  sense  is  excellent  and  is  supported  by  i  Mace.  i.  54,  59, 
according  to  which  a  small  altar  was  reared  on  the  altar  of  burnt 
offering  in  the  Temple,  and  a  sacrifice  (probably  of  swine)  offered 
thereon  (t  Mace.  i.  47). 

cast  down  truth  :  i.  e.  the  true  religion. 

did  its  pleasure  and  prospered.  Cf.  verse  24,  a  Chron. 
xxxi.  21.     See  note  on  xi.  32. 

13-14,  Dialogue  between  two  angels  overheard  by  Daniel, 
through  which  he  receives  information  without  asking  any  question 
as  in  Zech.  i.  12. 

13.  The  words  following  '  vision,'  as  Driver  points  out,  must  be 
taken  in  apposition  as  indicating  the  contents  of  the  vision. 
Hence :  '  How  long  shall  be  the  vision  ?  the  continual  burnt 
offering,  and  the  transgression  that  maketh  desolate,  the  giving 
both  the  sanctuary  and  the  host,'  &c. 

There  are  many  inherent  difficulties  in  the  text,  but  with  the 
help  of  the  Versions  we  arrive  at  the  following  text  which  meets 
all  the  difficulties  :  '  How  long  is  the  vision  to  be,  while  the  daily 
burnt  offering  is  taken  away  (cno  added  with  LXX  and  Theod.), 
the  transgression  that  maketh  desolate  set  up,  and  the  sanctuary 
and  the  service  trodden  under  foot?'     See  note  on  verse  la. 


DANIEL  8.  15  89 

he  said  ^  unto  me,  Unto  two  thousand  and  three  hundred 
evenings  a7id  mornings ;  then  shall  the  sanctuary  be 
b  cleansed. 

And  it  came  to  pass,  when  I,  even  I  Daniel,  had  seen  15 
the  vision,  that  I  sought  c  to  understand  it ;  and,  behold, 
there  stood  before  me  as  the  appearance  of  a  man.    And  16 

^  According  to  the  ancient  versions,  unto  him. 
^  Heb.  justified.  "^  Heb.  understanding. 


14.  unto  me.     Read  with  the  Versions  :  '  unto  him.' 

two  thotisand  and  three  hundred  evenings  and  mornings. 
This  peculiar  method  of  reckoning  1,150  days  is  due  to  the  fact 
that  the  seer  regards  the  suppression  of  the  evening  and  morning 
sacrifices  as  the  chief  outrage  offered  by  Antiochus  to  religion. 
Accordingly  he  counts  up  the  omitted  sacrifices,  i.e.  fl.300  ^ 
1,150  days. 

This  time  determination  is  of  importance  in  settling  the  date  of 
our  author's  work.  It  is  clear  from  the  preceding  two  verses  that 
he  wrote  after  the  erection  of  the  heathen  altar  on  the  altar  of 
burnt  offering  on  the  15th  of  Chisleu,  i68  B.C.,  and  before  the 
dedication  of  the  new  altar  on  the  25th  of  Chisleu  (=  Dec),  1653.0. 
(see  I  Mace,  i.  54,  iv.  52  sq.)  ;  for  the  period  between  these  two 
amounts  only  to  3  3'ears  and  10  days.  Now,  if  we  reckon  the 
year  at  360,  364,  or  365  days,  three  years  and  ten  days  will  amount 
to  1,090,  r,i02,  or  1,105  days  respectively,  i.  e.  in  all  cases  less  than 
the  predicted  1,150  days.  Hence,  we  conclude  that  the  book  was 
written  before  the  dedication  of  the  new  altar,  since  otherwise 
the  period  of  1,150  days  would  be  unintelligible.  This  is  the  view 
also  of  Kuenen,  Wellhausen,  and  Kamphausen.  The  1,150  days 
is  therefore  a  bona  fide  prediction. 

With  this  period  of  the  suspension  of  the  daily  sacrifice  we  are 
not  to  confound  the  three  and  a  half  years  (vii.  25,  xii.  7),  during 
which  the  entire  persecution  was  to  last.     Yet  see  ix.  27. 

the  sanctuary  be  cleansed.  Better  read  'justified,'  as  in 
R.V.  marg.  After  the  lapse  of  the  above  period  the  Jewish 
sanctuary  will  come  into  its  rights,  be  vindicated. 

15-18.    The  appearance  of  Gabriel. 

15.  as  the  appearance  of  a  man.  We  have  in  '  as  the  appear- 
ance of  the  apocalyptic  form  of  expression  already  found  in 
Ezek.  i.  13,  14,  26,  27,  28,  viii.  2,  &c.  He  is  called  *  the  man 
Gabriel'  in  ix.  21.  The  word  used  for  man,  geber,  is  evidently 
chosen  as  a  play  on  the  word  '  Gabriel'  ■=  'man  of  God.'  It  is 
worth  observing  here  that  though  geber  =  ^vqp^  the  LXX  here 


90  DANIEL  8.  16-18 

I  neard  a  man's  voice  between  the  batiks  ^Ulai,  which 
called,  and  said,  Gabriel,  make  this  man  to  understand 

'7  the  vision.  So  he  came  near  where  I  stood;  and  when 
he  came,  I  was  affrighted,  and  fell  upon  my  face :  but 
he  said  unto  me.  Understand,  O  son  of  man  ;   for  the 

1 8  vision  belongeth  to  the  time  of  the  end.     Now  as  he  was 


renders  the  entire  phrase  is  opaais  dv$pwirov.  This  fact  in  itself 
(cf.  the  renderings  in  vii.  13  and  viii.  16)  should  be  sufficient  to 
put  scholars  on  their  guard  against  laying  too  much  weight  on  the 
variations  in  the  renderings  of  '  Son  of  Man  '  in  i  Enoch. 

16.  a  man's  voice.  Since  the  voice  so  described  is  heard  in 
a  vision  it  is  not  improbable  that  the  words  signify  '  an  angelic 
voice  ; '  for  in  a  vision  an  angel  is  described  as  a  man  :  cf.  x.  5. 

between  the  banks  of  Ulai.  Apparently  we  must  supply 
the  words  '  the  banks  of.'  Cf.  2.  The  voice  was  heard  above  the 
river  :  cf.  xii,  6  sq. 

Gabriel.  Gabriel  is  the  first  angel  to  be  mentioned  expressly 
by  name  in  the  O.T.  In  ix.  21  he  explains  to  Daniel  Jeremiah's 
prophecy  of  the  seventy  years.  In  i  Enoch  ix.  i,  xx.  7,  passages 
which  are  most  probably  older  than  our  text,  he  is  one  of  the  four 
and  seven  archangels  respectively. 

17.  came  near.  The  two  Greek  versions  and  the  Vulg.  read 
*  came  and  stood  near.' 

fell  upon  my  face.  On  the  appearance  of  angelic  visitants 
the  seer  falls  on  his  face  through  fear :  cf.  Ezek.  i.  28,  iii.  23, 
xliii.  3,  Rev.  i.  17. 

son  of  man.  A  natural  designation  of  a  human  being  by  an 
angelic  one  :  cf.  Ezek.  ii.  i,  3,  6,  &c.  This  designation  has  nothing 
in  common  with  the  Messianic  one,  '  Son  of  Man.' 

for  the  vision  belongeth  to  the  time  of  the  end.  Cf.  verse 
19.  Hab.  ii.  3,  '  For  the  vision  is  yet  for  the  appointed  time,  and  it 
hasteth  toward  the  end.'  Gabriel  bids  the  seer  to  give  heed  to 
the  vision,  inasmuch  as  it  dealt  with  no  less  a  crisis  than  the  final 
one  of  the  world's  history.  For  the  writer  this  was  the  age  of 
Antiochus.  Time  was  then  to  give  place  to  the  kingdom  of  the 
Eternal.  In  our  text  we  have  the  expression  '  time  of  the  end,' 
viii.  17,  xi.  35,  40,  xii.  4,  9  (cf.  2  Bar.  xxix.  8,  lix.  4},  *  the  end,' 
ix.  26,  xii.  13  (vii.  26),  4he  appointed  time  of  the  end,'  viii.  19. 
The  O.T.  expression  *  in  the  end  of  the  days'  is  the  oldest 
eschatological  expression.     See  Volz,  Jiidische  Eschatologte,  p.  189. 

18.  On  hearing  the  voice  of  the  angel  Daniel  loses  conscious- 
ness :  cf,  X.  9.     Not  till  the  angel  touches  him  is  his  consciousness 


DANIEL  8.  19-21  91 

speaking  with  me,  I  fell  into  a  deep  sleep  with  my  face 
toward  the  ground :    but  he  touched  me,  and  set  me 
a  upright.     And  he  said.  Behold,  I  will  make  thee  know  19 
what  shall  be  in  the  latter  time  of  the  indignation :  for  it 
belongeth  to  the  appointed  time  of  the  end.     The  ram  20 
which  thou  sawest  that  had  the  two  horns,  they  are  the 
kings  of  Media  and  Persia.     And  the  rough  he-goat  is  21 
*  Or,  where  I  had  stood 


restored  :  cf.  x.   10,  16,  18,  i  Enoch  Ix.  3,  4,  4  Ezra  v.   14,   15, 
Rev.  i.  17. 

set  me  uprigfht :  lit.  '  made  me  to  stand  in  my  standing 
place.'  The  words  'in  my  standing  place'  (cf.  x.  11)  represent 
a  late  Hebrew  idiom  found  only  in  2  Chronicles  and  Nehemiah 
outside  Daniel.  The  classical  Hebrew  would  be  '  in  mj'  place  ' 
(i  Sam.  xiv.  9),  or  '  on  my  feet'  (Ezek.  ii.  2). 

19-26.   GabrieVs  explanation  of  the  vision. 

19.  the  latter  time  of  the  indignation,  or  better,  'the  last 
time,'  &c.  The  word  'indignation'  is  the  technical  tenn  for  the 
wrath  of  God,  which  Israel  and  Judah  had  incurred,  according  to 
the  teaching  of  the  pre-exilic  prophets.  This  wrath  has  manifested 
itself  in  Israel's  subjection  to  the  nations.  After  the  exile  it  was 
expected  to  come  to  an  end  in  the  immediate  future,  but  this 
consummation  was  ever  deferred  till  in  the  time  of  our  author  the 
faithful  did  not  hope  for  its  close  till  the  final  judgement,  and  the 
advent  of  the  kingdom  of  the  saints.  According  to  our  author 
the  Divine  wrath  was  to  be  fully  satisfied  during  the  persecution 
of  Antiochus  (xi.  36}.  On  the  accomplishment  of  the  wrath  of 
God  cf.  Isa.  V.  25,  X.  25. 

20.  the  king's  of  Media  and  Persia :  1.  e.  the  kingdoms  as  in 
vii.  17. 

21.  the  rough  he-goat.  In  the  original  this  is  an  extraordinary 
compound  expression.  First  comes  hasjaphir^  a  late  Hebrew 
word — probably  a  loan-word  from  Aramaic  (see  verse  5,  note), 
which  means  'the  he-goat.'  Then  we  have  haiia'ir,  which  is 
classical  Hebrew  for  '  the  he-goat,'  but  is  rendered  by  '  the  rough  * 
in  the  R,V.,  which  is  of  course  a  possible  rendering.  Perhaps  it 
would  be  best,  as  Driver  suggests,  to  omit  the  latter  word  ns  an 
explanatory  gloss.  Otherwise  we  might  regard  hassa'ir  as  a 
corruption  of  ha'issifii,  the  text  implied  by  the  two  Greek  versions, 
Pesh.,  and  Vulg.  In  either  case,  therefore,  we  should  simply 
read  '  the  he-goat.' 

K 


92  DANIEL  8.  22-34 

the  king  of  ^  Greece :  and  the  great  horn  that  is  between 

22  his  eyes  is  the  first  king.     And  as  for  that  which  was 

broken,  in  the  place  whereof  four  stood  up,  four  kingdoms 

shall  stand  up  out  of  the  nation,  but  not  with  his  power. 

33  And   in   the    latter   time    of  their   kingdom,  when   the 

transgressors   are   come   to    the   full,   a   king  of  fierce 

countenance,    and  understanding  dark  sentences,  shall 

24  stand  up.     And  his  power  shall  be  mighty,  but  not  ^  by 

*  Heb.  Javan.  *•  Or,  with  his  power.     See  verse  22. 


kiugf  of  Greece.  Here  melech  (  = '  king  ')  stands  for '  kingdom,' 
but  for  '  king '  in  the  next  sentence. 

the  first  king :  i.  e.  Alexander  the  Great. 

22.  stand  up,  or  '  arise.'  Here,  as  in  late  Hebrew  (cf.  viii,  23, 
xi.  2,  3,  4,  xii.  I,  3,  Ezra  ii.  63,  Neh.  viii.  5),  'dniad  is  used  in  the 
sense  of  '  arising,'  '  coming  on  the  scene,'  like  the  early 
Hebrew  kt'tw. 

out  of  the  nation.  The  text,  which  reads  'out  of  a  nation* 
should  with  the  two  Greek  versions  be  emended  into  '  out  of  his 
nation.' 

not  with  his  power.  None  of  the  four  kingdoms  (see  note 
on  verse  8)  which  were  to  arise  on  the  division  of  Alexander's 
empire  would  be  of  like  power. 

23.  their  king'dom.  The  four  kingdoms  were  to  come  to  an 
end  with  the  death  of  Antiochus. 

when  the  transg'ressors  are  come  to  the  fall.  The  Versions 
presuppose  a  slightly  different  text  :  *  when  the  measure  of 
transgressions  is  come  to  the  full.'  Some  interpret  these  words 
as  referring  to  Israel's  transgressions,  others  as  referring  to  those 
of  the  heathen. 

of  fierce  countenance.  This  expression  is  borrowed  from 
Deut.  xxviii.  50. 

understandingr  dark  sentences  (cf.  v.  12).  The  sense, 
rather,  is  that  he  was  skilled  in  ambiguous  expression.  The  same 
idea  is  partly  to  be  found  in  xi.  21,  where  he  is  said  to  have 
'  obtained  the  kingdom  by  flatteries.' 

24.  but  not  by  his  own  power.  This  rendering  implies  that 
Antiochus  would  be  strong  by  the  permission  of  God.  It  would 
be  better  to  render  'not  by  his  power,'  i.  e.  but  by  his  intrigues. 
But  Marti  may  be  right  in  regarding  this  phrase  as  a  repetition 
from  verse  22.     Theod.  omits. 


DANIEL  8.  25,  26  93 

his  own  power ;  and  he  shall  ^  destroy  wonderfully,  and 
shall  prosper  and  do  his  pleasure  :  and  he  shall  *  destroy 
the  mighty  ones  and  ^  the  holy  people.  And  through  25 
his  policy  he  shall  cause  craft  to  prosper  in  his  hand  ; 
and  he  shall  magnify  himself  in  his  heart,  and  in  their 
security  shall  he  ^  destroy  many  :  he  shall  also  stand  up 
against  the  prince  of  princes ;  but  he  shall  be  broken 
without  hand.  And  the  vision  of  the  evenings  and  36 
mornings  which  hath  been  told  is  true :  but  shut  thou 
*  Or,  corrupt  ^  Heb.  people  of  the  saints. 

shall  destroy  wonderfally.  Bevan,  followed  by  Marti, 
regards  the  text  here  as  corrupt,  and  emends  ynshttfi,  *  shall 
destroy,'  mio  yasiah,  'shall  utter  monstrous  things'  They  com- 
pare xi.  36  and  vii.  8,  20. 

24-25.  he  shall  destroy  the  mighty  ones  and  the  holy  people. 
25.  And  through  his  policy  he  shall  cause  craft  to  prosper  in 
his  hand.  By  a  comparison  of  the  LXX,  Graetz,  Bevan,  Marti, 
and  others  rightly  emend  the  above  into  :  *  He  shall  destroy  the 
mighty  ones  (i.  e.  his  political  foes).  25.  And  against  the  holy 
people  (i.  e.  his  religious  foes)  shall  his  policy  be  directed,  and  he 
shall  cause  craft,'  &c. 

25.  magnify  himself  in  his  heart.  Cf.  4,  8,  ir.  The  text 
could  mean  also  '  devised  great  things.' 

in  their  security  shall  he  destroy  many.  Antiochus  will 
take  them  while  off  their  guard.  But  bUlalvah  can  also  be 
rendered  *  unawares.'  The  text  probably  refers  to  the  treacherous 
attack  on  Jerusalem  recounted  in  r  Mace.  i.  29,  30,  where  the 
Greek  word  i^aniva  is  used,  which  Greek  word  is  twice  in  the 
LXX  of  Dan.  xi.  21,  24  a  rendering  oi  b^sahah, 

prince  of  princes  :  i.  e.  God.  Cf.  verse  ji  The  princes  are 
the  angelic  chiefs.  Cf.  xii.  i,  'Michael  the  great  prince,' 
also  x.  20. 

broken  without  hand:  i.e.  by  Divine  intervention.  Cf. 
ii.  34.  According  to  Polybius  xxxi.  2,  Antiochus  died  suddenly  at 
Tabae  in  Persia  in  164  e.g.,  a  few  months  after  the  rededication  of 
the  Temple,  25  Chisleu,  165.     See  note  on  xi.  45. 

26.  vision  of  the  evenings,  S:c.     Cf.  verse  14. 

is  true.     Cf.  x.  i,  xi.  2,  xii.  7,  Rev.  xix.  9,  xxi.  5,  xxii.  6. 

shut  thou  up  the  vision.  This  vision,  which  is  placed  by 
the  seer  in  the  third  year  cf  Belshazzar,  relates  really  to  the  time 
of  Antiochus.     It  is  to  be  *  sealed,'  i.  e.  kept  secret.     This  com- 

K  2 


94  DANIEL  8.  27—9.  i 

up  the  vision ;   for  it  belongeth  to  many  days  to.co7ne. 

27  And  I  Daniel  fainted,  and  was  sick  certain  days ;  then 
I  rose  up,  and  did  the  king's  business :  and  I  was 
astonished  at  the  vision,  «■  but  none  understood  it. 

9  In  the  first  year  of  Darius  the  son  of  Ahasuerus,  of  the 
*  Or,  hut  there  was  none  to  make  it  understood 

mand  is  intended  to  explain  how  this  revelation  made  to  Daniel 
appeared  first  in  the  days  of  Antiochus.  Cf.  xii.  4,  9.  Besides, 
the  seer  declares  that  only  the  wise  of  that  period  would  be  able 
to  understand  it.  Cf.  xii.  lo.  On  the  idea  of  reserving  a  revela- 
tion for  a  distant  age  cf.  i  Enoch  i.  2,  civ.  13,  and  contrast 
Rev.  xxii.  10.  In  4  Ezra  xiv.  46  the  secret  books  are  committed 
to  the  keeping  of  'the  wise.'  The  idea  of  'sealing'  is  found  in 
Isa.  viii.  i6,  but  in  a  figurative  sense. 

belongeth  to  many  days  to  come :  i.  e.  refers  to  the  distant 
age.  The  same  Hebrew  phrase  already  occurs  in  Ezek.  xii.  27. 
Cf.  viii.  17,  19,  x.  14  of  our  text. 

27.  fainted.  This  word,  which  occurs  here  and  in  ii.  i  and 
Mic.  ii.  4  (where  it  is  corrupt),  is  unexampled  in  this  sense 
elsewhere  in  O.T.  It  is  omitted  by  the  LXX,  and  is  manifestly  a 
dittograph  of  the  following  word. 

none  understood  it.  Since  the  vision  was  sealed  up,  i.  e. 
withheld  from  Daniel's  companions,  it  cannot  refer  to  them.  Since 
it  was  fully  explained  to  Daniel  according  to  16,  19,  it  cannot  be 
said  of  Daniel  that  he  did  not  understand  the  vision.  Various 
explanations  are  offered  :  Meinhold  takes  it  to  mean  that  no  one 
perceived  that  Daniel  had  had  a  vision — a  remark  that  would  be 
superfluous  after  the  command  to  seal  up  the  vision.  Marti, 
following  Bevan,  regards  the  phrase  as  defective  for  '  I  did  not 
understand,'  and  thinks  that  Daniel  did  not  understand  the  com- 
mand to  seal  up  the  vision,  seeing  it  belonged  to  a  distant  age. 

ix.  In  the  closing  verses  of  the  preceding  chapter  Daniel  is 
told  that  the  vision  he  had  just  seen  related  not  to  his  own  time 
but  to  a  distant  future  (viii.  26).  This  statement  astonished 
Daniel  (viii.  27),  seeing  that,  like  his  contemporaries,  he  was  look- 
ing forward  to  the  speedy  advent  of  the  deliverance  at  the  close 
of  the  70  years  definitely  promised  by  Jeremiah  (xxix.  10,  xxv. 
II}.  Accordingly,  the  seer  is  represented  in  the  present  chapter 
as  engaged  on  this  very  question  (ix,  1-2).  If  the  promised 
deliverance  belongs  to  the  far  distant  future,  how  is  Jeremiah's 
prophecy  of  the  70  years  to  be  fulfilled  ?  In  his  bewilderment  he 
has  recourse  to  prayer,  and  asks  that  the  right  interpretation  of 
this  prophecy  may  be  revealed  to  him  (ix.  3).    And  before  he  had 


DANIEL  9.  2  95 

seed  of  the  Medes,  which  was  made  king  over  the  realm 
of  the  Chaldeans ;  in  the  first  year  of  his  reign  I  Daniel  a 
understood  by  the  books  the  number  of  the  years,  whereof 


ceased  praying  (ix.  21)  the  angel  Gabriel  came  to  him  and  showed 
him  that  the  70  years  were  not  70  literal  years  but  70  weeks  of 
years  (ix.  22-24).  In  24-27  a  detailed  interpretation  of  the  70 
weeks  of  years  is  given.  The  70  weeks  are  divided  into  three 
periods:  7  +  62+1.  The  first  period,  i.e.  49  years,  will  extend 
from  the  going  forth  of  the  word  till  the  time  of  Joshua  the  high- 
priest,  586-538  B.  c.  During  the  second  period  of  62  weeks,  i.  e.  434 
years,  the  city  will  be  rebuilt.  At  the  close  of  the  last  period  will 
begin  the  70th  week  of  tribulation,  when  an  anointed  one  will  be 
cut  off,  religion  forsaken,  sacrifice  and  oblation  cease  to  be  offered, 
the  abomination  that  maketh  desolate  set  up,  till  at  last  the 
desolater  is  destroyed  (verses  24-27). 

Into  this  chapter  has  been  incorporated  the  only  large  inter- 
polation in  the  Book  of  Daniel,  i.e.  verses  4-19.  For  the  grounds 
on  which  this  conclusion  is  drawn  see  the  notes  in  he.  This 
section  deals  with  subjects  with  which  neither  the  present  context 
nor  the  rest  of  the  book  is  concerned. 

1.  Darius.    See  note  on  v.  31. 

son  of  Ahasuerus.  Ahasuerus  is  a  transliteration  of  the 
Hebrew  u:Tnu:rT« — Achashwerosh  (cf.  Ezra  iv.  6,  Esther  i.  i  sqq.), 
which  in  Greek  took  the  form  of  Xerxes.  Xerxes  I,  who 
reigned  from  485  to  465  B.C.  was  the  son  of  Darius  Hystaspis 
(521-485  B.C.)  and  not  the  father. 

2.  Daniel  is  represented  as  reflecting  on  Jeremiah's  prediction 
of  the  70  years'  exile.  The  author  of  our  book  was  profoundly 
conscious  that  this  prediction  had  not  been  fulfilled  except  in  a 
very  minor  degree.  Since,  however,  no  such  prophecy  could  fail, 
he  necessarily  concluded  that  it  had  been  misinterpreted  and 
therefore  needed  to  be  interpreted  afresh.  This  new  interpre- 
tation is  given  in  the  vision  in  24-27.  The  probability  that  this 
reinterpretation  was  suggested  by  a  comparison  of  Lev.  xxvi. 
18  sqq.  (where  it  is  said  that  the  Israelites  are  to  be  punished 
seven  times  for  their  sins)  and  Jen  xxix.  10,  xxv.  11  does  not 
invalidate  the  reality  of  the  vision  nor  the  possibility  that  this 
reinterpretation  was  actually  received  in  a  vision.  For  the  mind 
of  the  seer  necessarily  works  with  materials  at  hand,  however  it 
may  draw  on  other  sources. 

understood  by  the  books.  Better  render  '  observed  in  the 
books.' 

by  the  books.  The  books  here  are  the  sacred  books,  i.e.  the 
Scriptures.     The  phrase  implies  the  formation  of  a  definite  col- 


96  DANIEL  9.  3 

the  word  of  the  Lord  came  to  Jeremiah  the  prophet,  for 

the  accomplishing  of  the  desolations  of  Jerusalem,  even 

3  seventy  years.     And  I  set  my  face  unto  the  Lord  God, 

*to  seek  by  prayer  and  supplications,  with  fasting,  and 

*  Or,  to  seek  after  prayer  If  c. 


lection  of  O.T.  books,  but  how  extensive  this  collection  was 
cannot  be  determined  from  the  present  statement.  That  the 
threefold  division  of  the  O.T.,  the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the 
Hagiographa,  already  existed  in  some  form  we  know  from 
the  Preface  to  Sirach. 

the  word  of  the  Lord,  i.e.  *the  word  ofYahweh.'  Since 
verses  4-20  did  not  belong  originally  to  the  text,  as  we  shall  see 
presently,  this  would  be  the  only  verse  in  Daniel  where  the 
divine  name  Yahweh  would  be  used.  Von  Gall  excises  it  on  this 
ground  and  compares  23,  25  for  the  use  of  *  word  '  or  *  the  word.' 
Marti  would  let  it  stand  on  the  ground  that  the  writer  is  using  a 
citation  from  Jeremiah. 

came  to  Jeremiah  .  .  .  seventy  years.  Cf.  Jer.  xxv.  11-12, 
xxix.  10. 

3.  set   my  face.      For  the  same  phrase  see  2  Chron.  xx.  3, 
xxxii.  2,  and  compare  vi.  14  of  our  text. 

Lord  God.  The  word  Adonai  (  -  Lord)  is  found  also  in  i.  2, 
and  frequently  in  ix.  4-20. 

to  seek  by  prayer.  The  Hebrew  is  literally  'to  seek  prayer.' 
Cf.  Zeph.  ii.  3. 

with  fasting*,  i.  e.  as  a  preparation  for  the  reception  of  a 
revelation  ;  cf.  Exod.  xxxiv.  28,  Deut.  ix.  9,  Esth.  iv.  6.  In  these 
verses  we  have  the  only  considerable  interpolation  in  Daniel,  as 
von  Gall  has  recognized.  Some  of  the  grounds  for  excising  these 
verses  as  an  addition  are  :  1".  They  betray  the  hand  of  an  inter- 
polator since  they  are  unnecessary  repetitions  of  verses  3  and  2r. 
2°.  The  conclusion  of  the  chapter  takes  no  account  of  the  subject 
of  the  prayer,  which  supplicates  for  forgiveness  and  deliverance, 
but  passes  on  at  once  to  the  explanation  of  the  prophecy  of 
Jeremiah.  3".  The  prayer  contains  clear  evidence  of  having  been 
written  in  Palestine  and  not  in  the  Exile.  Thus  in  ver.  7  it 
speaks  of  those  '  that  are  near  and  that  are  far  off  in  all  the 
countries  whither  thou  hast  driven  them.'  Those  '  that  are  near  ' 
are  obviously  the  Jews  in  Palestine  as  opposed  to  those  '  that  are 
far  off  in  all  the  countries.'  Again  in  ver.  16,  *  Because  for  our 
sins  and  for  the  iniquities  of  our  fathers,  Jerusalem  and  thy 
people  are  become  a  reproach  to  all  that  are  round  about  us,''  the 
words  in  italics  show  that  the  prayer  was  written  by  a  resident 


DANIEL  9.  4-6  97 

sackcloth,  and  ashes.  And  I  prayed  unto  the  Lord  my  4 
God,  and  made  confession,  and  said,  O  Lord,  the  great 
and  dreadful  God,  which  keepeth  covenant  and  mercy 
with  them  that  love  him  and  keep  his  commandments ; 
we  have  sinned,  and  have  dealt  perversely,  and  have  done  5 
wickedly,  and  have  rebelled,  even  turning  aside  from  thy 
precepts   and   from   thy   judgements  :  neither  have  we  6 


in  Judaea.  In  i  and  2  Baruch  analogous  phenomena  are  found. 
4".  The  name  Yahweh  is  found  in  these  verses  but  not  elsewhere 
in  Daniel,  except  in  ver.  a,  where  it  was  inserted  probabl}' by  the 
hand  that  added  4-19.  5°.  The  pra3'er  asks  for  the  immediate 
advent  of  the  kingdom.  But,  according  to  Jeremiah's  prophecj', 
Daniel  knew  that  his  deliverance  could  not  come  for  *  many  days 
to  come,'  viii.  26,  i.e.  a  distant  future.  6".  A  critical  comparison 
of  4-19  with  Neh.  i.  5  sqq.,  ix.  6  sqq.,  i  Baruch  i.  15  sqq.,  shows 
that  repeatedly  the  verses  in  Daniel  agree  word  for  word  with 
those  in  the  passages  just  mentioned,  that  the  writers  o-f  these 
passages  have  not  borrowed  from  each  other  but  from  existing 
liturgical  forms,  which  each  writer  adapted  more  or  less  fully  to 
his  own  requirements. 

On  the  above  grounds,  which  could  be  added  to,  it  is  to  be 
concluded  that  4-19  is  an  addition  to  the  text  like  the  Prayer  of 
Azariah  and  the  Three  Children,  but  an  earlier  one. 

4.  made  confession.  Cf  Neh.  i.  6,  ix.  2,  3,  where  this 
expression  occurs  in  like  contexts. 

O  Lord,  the  great  and  dreadful  God  ;  .  .  commandments. 
Occurs  as  a  whole  in  Neh.  i.  5  and  in  part  in  Neh.  ix.  32.  It  was 
clearly  a  current  liturgical  form.  The  ultimate  source  is  to  be 
found  in  Deut.  vii.  9.  The  particle  rendered  *  O  '  is  a  strong 
expression  of  entreaty,  '  Ah,  now.'  It  is  found  in  Neh.  i.  5  in  the 
same  connexion  where  the  R.V.  renders  it  *I  beseech  thee.' 

love  him  .  .  .  his  commandments.  Read  '  Love  thee  .  .  . 
thy  commandments  '  with  LXX,  Theod.,  and  Vulgate.  Cf.  the 
next  verse. 

5.  have  sinned  .  .  .  done  wickedly.  The  ultimate  source  of 
these  words  is  i  Kings  viii.  47.  In  due  time  they  found  their 
way  into  current  liturgies.  Thus  they  occur  exactly  as  in  our 
text  in  I  Bar.  ii.  12,  and  in  a  closely  related  form  in  Ps.  cvi.  6. 

even  turning^  aside  from  thy  precepts.  This  is  a  miSr 
translation  for  '  and  turned  aside  from  thy  commandments.' 
Cf.  Deut.  xvii.  20,  Ps.  cxix.  102. 

G.  Two  classes  are  here  distinguished,  the  nobility  embracing 
the  kings,  princes  and  fathers,  and  the  people  of  the  land.     This 


98  DANIEL  9.  7-9 

hearkened  unto  thy  servants  the  prophets,  which  spake 
in  thy  name  to  our  kings,  our  princes,  and  our  fathers, 

7  and  to  all  the  people  of  the  land.  O  Lord,  righteousness 
belongeth  unto  thee,  but  unto  us  confusion  of  face,  as  at 
this  day  ;  to  the  men  of  Judah,  and  to  the  inhabitants  of 
Jerusalem,  and  unto  all  Israel,  that  are  near,  and  that  are 
far  off,  through  all  the  countries  whither  thou  hast 
driven  them,  because  of  their  trespass  that  they  have 

8  trespassed  against  thee.  O  Lord,  to  us  belongeth  con- 
fusion of  face,  to  our  kings,  to  our  princes,  and  to  our 

9  fathers,  because  we  have  sinned  against  thee.     To  the 


latter  phrase  came  in  later  Judaism  to  denote  the  uncultured 
laity.  The  term  '  fathers '  here  does  not  mean  forefathers  but 
leaders. 

hearkened  unto  thy  servants  the  prophets.  Cf.  i  Bar,  i. 
21.  The  words  are  a  reminiscence  of  Jer.  xxvi.  5  ;  cf.  vii.  25, 
XXV.  4,  &c. 

to  our  king's,  our  princes,  and  our  fathers,  and  to  all  the 
people  of  the  land.  Cf.  ver.  7.  This  clause  is  drawn  from  Jer. 
xliv.  21,  where  the  order  differs  slightly.  Cf.  Neh.  ix.  3a,  34, 
1  Bar.  i.  16,  ii.  i,  for  similar  enumerations. 

7.  rig-hteousness  belong'eth  unto  thee,  but  unto  us  con- 
fusion of  face,  as  at  this  day.  These  words  are  exactly  as  they 
stand  here  in  i  Bar.  i.  15,  ii.  6.  The  second  phrase  is  found  in 
Ps.  xliv.  15,  Jer.  vii.  19,  a  Chron.  xxxii,  21. 

to  the  men  of  Judah,  and  to  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem. 
This  combination  is  peculiar  to  Jeremiah  (eight  times)  and  2  Kings 
xxiii.  a  (■=  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  30)  in  the  O.T.  outside  the  present 
passage.     It  appears  in  i  Bar.  i.  15. 

that  are  near,  and  that  are  far  off.     From  Jer.  xxv.  26. 

in  {better  tlian  'through')  all  the  countries  whither 
thou  hast  driven  them.  From  Jer.  xvi.  15,  xxiii.  3,  8,  &c.  This 
clause  is  reproduced  in  i  Bar.  ii.  4,  13,  29. 

their  trespass  that  they  have  trespassed  ag'ainst  thee. 
The  word  ;;;«'«/  means  treachery  or  disloj'alty  rather  than 
*  trespass.'  The  clause  is  found  in  Lev.  xxvi.  40,  Ezek.  xvii.  ao, 
xviii.  24,  &C. 

8-9.  These  two  verses  are  expansions  of  the  introductory 
clauses  in  ver.  7. 

8.  to  us  .  .  .  confusion  of  face.     Cf.  ver.  7  note. 
to  our  king's,  &c.     Cf.  ver.  6  note. 


DANIEL  9.  10-12  99 

Lord  our  God  belong  mercies  and  forgivenesses  ;  ^  for  we 
have  rebelled  against  him  ;  neither  have  we  obeyed  the  lo 
voice  of  the  Lord  our  God,  to  walk  in  his  laws,  which 
he  set  before  us  by  his  servants  the  prophets.  Yea,  all  n 
Israel  have  transgressed  thy  law,  even  turning  aside,  that 
they  should  not  obey  thy  voice  :  therefore  hath  the  curse 
been  poured  out  upon  us,  and  the  oath  that  is  written  in 
the  law  of  Moses  the  servant  of  God  ;  for  we  have  sinned 
against  him.    And  he  hath  confirmed  his  words,  which  he  12 

■■  Or,  though 


9.  forgivenesses.     Cf.  Neh.  ix.  17  'a  God  of  forgiveness.* 

10.  The  various  elements  of  this  verse  can  be  traced  to  Exod., 
Deut.,  and  Jeremiah.  Thus  the  clause  *  obeyed  the  voice  of  the 
Lord  our  God'  is  found  in  Deut.  iv.  30,  ix.  23,  xxviii.  i,  2,  15, 
Exod.  XV.  26,  xix.  5,  Jer.  xliv.  23,  &c.  For  *  to  walk  in  his  laws  ' 
cf.  Exod.  xvi.  4,  Lev.  xxvi.  3,  Jer.  xxvi.  4,  and  for  '  which  is  set 
before  us'  cf.  Deut.  iv.  44,  Jer.  ix.  13,  xxvi.  4,  &c.  But  as  has 
already  been  suggested  the  immediate  source  of  the  words  is  most 
probably  current  liturgical  formulae.  Cf.  Neh.  i.  7,  ix.  14,  and 
especially  i  Bar.  i.  18,  ii.  10.  A  comparison  of  these  passages 
with  Jer.  xxvi.  4  leads  one  to  suggest  that  the  text  is  defective,  and 
that  we  should  read  :  '  neither  have  we  obeyed  the  voice  of  the 
Lord  our  God  to  walk  in  his  laws  that  he  set  before  us  by  {his 
servant  Moses,  nor  have  we  obeyed  the  words  of)  his  servants 
the  prophets.'  The  loss  of  the  restored  clause  could  easily  be 
explained  by  hofnoioteleuton.  If  we  do  not  accept  the  above 
addition,  then  instead  of  *  to  walk  in  his  laws  that  he  set  before  us 
by  his  servants  the  prophets,*  we  might  simply  read  *  to  walk  in 
his  law  that  he  set  before  us  by  his  servant  Moses.'  That  Moses 
was  mentioned  in  this  verse  is  most  probable  from  ver.  11. 

11.  even  tumingf  aside.  A  mistranslation  for  '  and  have  turned 
aside.'     Cf.  ver.  5. 

tlie  curse  . .  .  and  the  oath.     Cf.  Num.  v.  21,  Neh.  x.  29. 

the  curse  .  .  .  that  is  written  in  the  law  of  Moses.  Cf. 
Deut.  xxix.  20,  *  All  the  curse  that  is  written  in  this  book  shall  lie 
upon  him.'     Cf.  i  Bar.  i.  20. 

poured  out.  This  expression  is  used  of  anger  in  Jer.  xlii.  18, 
xliv.  6,  2  Chron.  xii.  7,  xxxiv.  25,  &c. 

12.  Cf.  I  Bar.  ii.  i,  2. 

hath  confirmed  his  words.  The  clause  is  found  also  in 
Neh.  ix.  8  and  i  Bar.  ii.  i,  24. 


loo  DANIEL  9.  13-15 

spake  against  us,  and  against  our  judges  that  judged  us, 
by  bringing  upon  us  a  great  evil :  for  under  the  whole 
heaven  hath  not  been  done  as  hath  been  done  upon 

13  Jerusalem.  As  it  is  written  in  the  law  of  Moses,  all  this 
evil  is  come  upon  us  :  yet  have  we  not  intreated  the 
favour  of  the  Lord  our  God,  that  we  should  turn  from  our 

14  iniquities,  and  ^have  discernment  in  thy  truth.  Therefore 
hath  the  Lord  watched  over  the  evil,  and  brought  it  upon 
us :  for  the  Lord  our  God  is  righteous  in  all  his  works 

15  which  he  doeth,  and  we  have  not  obeyed  his  voice.  And 
now,  O  Lord  our  God,  that  hast  brought  thy  people  forth 

*  Or,  deal  wisely 

judg'es.  A  general  term  for  rulers  as  in  Ps.  ii.  10,  but  in  the 
parallel  passage  in  i  Bar.  ii.  i  the  term  is  used  of  the  Judges  in 
Israel  that  preceded  the  Kings. 

for  under  the  whole  heaven  hath  not  been  done,  &c.  For 
an  expanded  form  of  this  expression  cf.  1  Bar.  ii,  2.  For  like 
expressions  cf.  Exod.  ix.  18,  x.  6,  xi.  6. 

13.  As  it  is  written,  &c.  Cf.  Deut.  xxviii.  15,  xxx.  i, 
I  Bar.  ii.  7. 

have  .  .  .  not  intreated  the  favour,  &c.  Cf.  i  Bar.  ii.  8. 
The  phrase  is  a  familiar  O.T.  one.  Cf.  Jer.  xxvi.  19,  Exod. 
xxxii.  II. 

14.  Cf.  I  Bar.  ii.  9-10. 

watched  over  the  evil.  Cf,  Jer.  i.  la,  where  the  same 
construction  occurs,  and  cf.  xliv.  27,  *  I  watch  over  them  for  evil.' 
Our  text  means  that  God  is  vigilant  in  bringing  about  his  threatened 
evil. 

Qod  is  rig-hteous.     Cf.  Jer.  xii.  i,  Ezra  ix.  15,  and  on  these 
and  the  following  words  cf.  Neh.  ix.  33,  r  Bar.  ii.  9-10. 
15-19.  Prayer  for  deliverance. 

15.  This  verse  is  made  up  of  clauses  borrowed  ultimately  from 
Jer.  xxxii.  20,  21.  The  first  clause  is  from  ver.  21,  and  the  second 
from  ver.  20.  i  Bar.  ii.  11  reproduces  more  literally  the  same 
passage  of  Jeremiah,  but  observes  the  same  order  in  the  clauses 
as  in  our  text,  and  similarly,  but  less  literally,  Neh.  ix,  10.  This 
fact  can  be  best  explained  by  assuming  an  intermediate  common 
source  for  Nehemiah,  Daniel,  and  i  Baruch. 

brong-ht  thy  people  forth  .  .  .  hand.  Cf.  Deut.  vi.  21, 
ix.  26.  Jer.  xxxii.  ai. 


DANIEL  9.  16,  17  101 

out  of  the  land  of  Egypt  with  a  mighty  hand,  and  hast 
gotten  thee  renown,  as  at  this  day ;  we  have  sinned,  we 
have  done  wickedly.  O  Lord,  according  to  all  thy  »  right-  16 
eousness,  let  thine  anger  and  thy  fury,  I  pray  thee,  be  turned 
away  from  thy  city  Jerusalem,  thy  holy  mountain  :  because 
for  our  sins,  and  for  the  iniquities  of  our  fathers,  Jerusalem 
and  thy  people  are  become  a  reproach  to  all  that  are 
round  about  us.  Now  therefore,  O  our  God,  hearken  unto  17 
the  prayer  of  thy  servant,  and  to  his  supplications,  and  cause 
thy  face  to  shine  upon  thysanctuary  that  is  desolate,  for  the 
*  Heb.  righteousnesses. 

Efotten  thee  renown.  Cf.  Isa.  Ixiii.  12,  14  and  the  passages 
referred  to  in  Jer.  and  Neh.  above. 

16.  thy  rig-hteousness  (marg.),  i.  e.  acts  or  deeds  of  righteous- 
ness as  Judges  v.  11,  i  Sam.  xii.  7. 

let  thine  ang^er  ,  ,  .  he  turned  away.  Cf.  Num.  xxv.  4, 
I  Bar.  ii.  [3. 

thy  holy  mountain.     Cf.  Isa.  ii.  2  sq.,  Ps.  ii.  6,  xv.  i. 

iniquities  of  our  fathers.  Cf.  Neh.  ix.  a,  i  Bar.  iii.  5,  7, 
8.  The  phrase  is  found  in  the  earlier  books,  Lev.  xxvi.  39,  Jer. 
xi.  10. 

a  reproach  to  all  that  are  round  about  us.  Cf.  Ps. 
xliv.  13,  Ixxix.  4.  These  words  are  spoken  from  the  standpoint 
of  a  Jew  resident  in  Judea  ;  see  note  above  on  4-19.  The  taunts 
came  from  their  heathen  neighbours  tlie  Edomites,  Ammonites, 
and  others.  It  is  worth  remarking  that  in  i  Par.  ii.  4,  iii.  8,  this 
phrase  is  appHed  by  the  Jews  in  Palestine  to  the  Jews  in  exile. 

17.  hearken  unto  the  prayer.     Cf.  Neh.  i.  6,   i  Kings  viii.  28, 
hearken  unto  the  prayer  .  .  .  supplications.      Cf.  i    Bar. 

ii.  14. 

cause  thy  face  to  shine.  Cf.  Num.  vi.  25,  Ps.  Ixxx.  19. 
This  petition  is  the  counterpart  of  *  let  thine  anger  ...  be  turned 
away  '  in  the  preceding  verse. 

desolate.  The  word  shametn  is  used  of  Mount  Zion  in 
Lam.  V.  18,  and  recalls  shotnem  in  viii.  13.  Cf.  ix.  27,  xi.  31, 
xii.  II. 

for  the  Lord's  sake.  This  abrupt  transition  to  the  third 
person  in  the  midst  of  a  series  of  petitions  in  the  second  is  very 
harsh,  and  suggests  a  corruption  in  the  text,  and  the  evidence  of 
the  ancient  versions  turns  this  probability  into  a  practical  cer- 
tainty.    Accordingly  we  should  cither  with  the  LXX  'iviK^v  tuv 


I02  DANIEL  9.  18-20 

18  Lord's  sake.  O  my  God,  incline  thine  ear,  and  hear; 
open  thine  eyes,  and  behold  our  desolations,  and  the  city 
which  is  called  by  thy  name  :  for  we  do  not  ^  present  our 
supplications  before  thee  for  our  righteousnesses,  but 

1 9  for  thy  great  mercies.  O  Lord,  hear  ;  O  Lord,  forgive  ; 
O  Lord,  hearken  and  do  ;  defer  not ;  for  thine  own  sake, 

0  my  God,  because  thy  city  and  thy  people  are  called  by 
thy  name. 

20  And  whiles  I  was  speaking,  and  praying,  and  confessing 
my  sin  and  the  sin  of  my  people  Israel,  and  presenting  my 

*  Heb.  cause  to /all.   See  Jer.  xxxvi.  7. 

SovXcuv  (Tov,  hiaiTora  read  *  for  thy  servant's  sake,  O  Lord  '  (com- 
paring Isa.  Ixiii.  17 — *  return  for  thy  servant's  sake  '),  or  with 
Theod.  and  the  Vulgate  '  for  thine  own  sake,  O  Lord.'  This 
latter,  which    recurs    in    ver.  19,   has  probably  the  support   of 

1  Bar.  ii.  14. 

18.  O  my  God  .  .  .  "behold.  These  clauses  are  borrowed 
literal!}'  from  2  Kings  xix.  16  (  =  Isa.  xxxvii.  17)  save  that  instead  of 
'O  m^'  God'  the  source  has  *0  Lord'  (i.e.  mn>).  The  same 
words  from  2  Kings  are  repeated  in  i  Bar.  ii.  16,  17,  but  there 
the  divine  title  Yahweh  is  preserved.  But  not  improbably  we 
should  read  '  O  Lord  '  in  our  text  also,  since  the  LXX  attests  it 

desolations.     Cf.  Isa.  Ixi.  4. 

the  city  which  is  called  by  thy  uauie.  The  Hebrew  is 
literally :  *  over  which  thy  name  is  called.'  This  phrase  recurs 
in  the  next  verse.  Cf.  Deut.  xxviii.  10,  2  Sam.  xii.  28,  Isa.  iv.  i, 
Amos  ix.  12,  Jer.  vii.  10.  There  is  a  parallel  to  our  text  in 
I  Bar.  ii.  15,  26. 

present  our  supplications  "before  thee — lit.  '  cause  to  fall 
.  .  ,  before  thee.'  This  expression  is  found  only  in  Jeremiah  in 
the  O.T.  Cf.  xxxviii.  26,  xlii.  2,  9,  xxxvi.  7.  "With  '  do  not  pre- 
sent .  .  .  our  righteousness'  compare  the  close  parallel  in  i  Bar. 
ii.  19. 

19.  hear  ,  .  .  forgive.  A  reminiscence  of  i  Kings  viii.  30, 
34,  36,  &c. 

20.  This  verse  serves  to  connect  4-19  with  the  context.  On 
ver.  3,  ver.  21  followed  immediately.  In  20  we  have  a  summary 
of  the  added  prayer.  It  is  composed  of  phrases  which  have 
alreadj'  occurred  in  4-19.  Thus  for  Spraying  and  confessing' 
cf.  ver.  4  ;  for  *  presenting  my  supplication '  cf.  ver.  18 ;  *  for  the 
holy  mountain  of  my  God'  cf.  ver.  16. 


DANIEL  9.  2  1-23  103 

supplication  before  the  Lord  my  God  for  the  holy  moun- 
tain of  my  God ;  yea,  whiles  I  was  speaking  in  prayer,  the  ai 
man  Gabriel,  whom  I  had  seen  in  the  vision  at  the  begin- 
ning, *  being  caused  to  fly  swiftly,  ^  touched  me  about  the 
time  of  the  evening  oblation.     And  he  f' instructed  me,  22 
and  talked  with  me,  and  said,  O  Daniel,  I  am  now  come 
forth  to  make  thee  skilful  of  understanding.    At  the  begin-  23 
ning  of  thy  supplications  the  commandment  went  forth, 

*  Or,  being  sore  wearied  ^  Or,  came  near  unto  nte 

'^  Or,  made  me  to  understand 


21.  Resumption  of  the  original  text. 
Gabriel.     See  viii.  16. 

being  caused  to  fly  swiftly.  In  the  margin  we  have  the 
alternative  rendering  'being  sore  wearied'  (lit.  'being  wearied  by 
weariness').  The  divergence  of  rendering  is  due  to  the  possibility 
of  deriving  the  participle  from  different  verbs — nir  'to  fly'  or 
F1S"  *to  be  weary.'  But  the  cognate  noun  (F^i"  —'weariness') 
which  accompanies  it  is  susceptible  of  only  one  sense.  Hence 
the  rendering  in  the  text  appears  to  be  unjustified.  The  versions 
are  in  favour  of  the  idea  of  flying.  Thus  the  LXX  has  to-xh 
<pep6fj.(uos,  Theod.  ireTufxevos,  Vulg.  cito  volans.  As  against  the 
idea  of  flight,  it  is  to  be  observed  that  the  O.T.  nowhere  else 
(except  in  xii.  6?)  represents  angels  as  having  wings.  The  first 
undoubted  passage  in  Jewish  literature  is  i  Enoch  Ixi.  r,  and  even 
there  the  angels  are  not  naturally  winged  but  only  adopt  wings 
for  a  special  purpose.  The  idea  of  wings  was  in  due  course 
taken  from  the  winged  Seraphim  and  Cherubim  and  assigned  to 
angels  generally. 

the  time  of  the  evening  oblation.     See  note  on  vi.  10. 

22.  he    instructed    me.     Better    with    the    LXX    and    the 
Peshitto  read  '  he  came.'     So  Bevan,  Driver,  and  others. 

Gabriel's  sole  communication   refers  to  the  seventy  weeks,  but 
in  no  single  respect  to  the  subjects  of  the  praj'er  in  4-19. 

23.  At  the  beginning  of  thy  supplications.     In  I.sa.  Ixv.  24 
the  promise  of  an  immediate  answer  to  prayer  is  given. 

the  commandment  went  forth.  The  text  here  should  be 
rendered  'a  word  went  forth,'  i.e.  the  divine  declaration  con- 
tained in  24-27.  The  same  expression  {dabar)  recurs  at  ihe  close 
of  the  verse  where  again  the  K.V.  '  consider  the  matter '  is  to  be 
corrected  into  '  consider  the  word.* 


I04  DANIEL  9,  24 

and  I  am  come  to  tell  thee ;  for  thou  art  ^  greatly  beloved  : 

therefore  consider  the  matter,  and  understand  the  vision. 

24  Seventy  weeks  are  decreed  upon  thy  people  and  upon  thy 

*  Or,  very  precious     Yich.  precious  things. 

greatly  beloved.  As  the  margin  shows,  the  Hebrew  is 
literally  'precious  things.'  But,  with  Theod.  and  the  Vulg.,  we 
should  prefix  ^ish  and  read  'man  of  desirableness,*  i.  e.  'man 
greatly  beloved'  as  in  x.  11,  19. 

consider  the  matter.  Read  'consider  the  word.'  Seethe 
last  note  but  one.  The  two  expressions  'word'  and  'vision' 
mean  practically  the  same  thing,  denoting  its  twofold  relation  in 
regard  to  God  and  in  regard  to  man. 

24-27.    The  seventy  weeks  of  years. 

24.  This  verse  lays  down  the  principle  that  the  seventy  years 
foretold  by  Jeremiah  are  to  be  understood  as  seventy  weeks  of  years. 
i.  e.  490  years,  and  that  these  years  concerned  God's  holy  city  and 
people.  This  is  clear  from  ver.  2  where  Daniel  is  said  to  have 
observed  in  the  Scriptures  that  the  seventy  years  of  Jeremiah  had 
reference  to  the  desolations  of  Jerusalem.  But  since  the  seer  did 
not  understand  how  this  prophecy  could  be  fulfilled  in  relation  to 
the  humiliation  of  Jerusalem,  he  sought  illumination  through  a 
vision  (ver.  3).  In  answer  to  his  prayer  Gabriel  is  sent,  who 
explained  the  years  as  meaning  weeks  of  years.  The  notion  of 
a  week  of  years  was  already  familiar  to  the  Jews,  since  the  word 
could  denote  either  the  seventh  day  or  the  seventh  year  (Lev. 
XXV.  2,  4\  But  the  word  'week,'  which  here  means  a  week  of 
years,  has  not  this  sense  elsewhere  in  the  O.T.  It  occurs,  how- 
ever, with  this  meaning  some  hundreds  of  times  in  Jubilees  (before 
100  B.  c.)  and  in  the  Mishna  (Sanh.  v.  i)  and  the  Talmud.  But  the 
way  had  been  prepared  for  the  statement  in  our  text  by  2  Chron. 
xxxvi.  21,  '  Until  the  land  had  enjoyed  her  sabbaths  ;  for  as  long 
as  she  lay  desolate  she  kept  sabbath,  to  fulfil  threescore  and  ten 
years '  (cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  34,  35).  Here  the  idea  of  seventy  years  and 
of  Sabbatical  years  are  brought  together. 

As  the  present  text  stands  this  verse  should  be  written  in  verse 
as  follows  : — 

'  Seventy  weeks  are  decreed  upon  thy  people  and  upon  thy  holy 
city, 
To  finish  the  transgression  and  to  make  an  end  of  sins, 
And  to  purge  away  iniquity  and  to  brirsg  in  everlasting  righteous- 
ness, 
And  to  seal  vision  and  prophet,  and  to  anoint  a  most  hoi}'  place.' 
But  if  the  writer  intended  to  write  in  verse,  something  seems 
wrong.     The   phrase    'tlia   transgression'   is   not    Darallel   with 


DANIEL  9.  24  105 

holy  city,  ^  to  finish  ^*  transgression,  and  ^  to  make  an  end 
of  sins,  and  to  '^make  reconciliation  for  iniquity,  and  to 
bring  in  everlasting  righteousness,  and  to  seal  up  vision 

■•  Or,  io  restrain  ^  Or,  the  transgression 

'^  Another  reading  is,  to  seal  up.  ^  Or,  purge  anay 

'sins.'  'The  transgression'  is  the  heathen  worship  established 
in  the  Temple;  cf.  viii.  12,  13,  23.  The  proper  parallel  to  *  to 
make  an  end  of  sins'  occurs  in  the  beginning  of  the  next  line — 
'  to  purge  away  iniquity.'  Not  impossibly,  therefore,  these  two 
phrases  belonged  to  line  3.  In  that  case,  we  should  transpose  '  to 
bring  in  everlasting  righteousness'  to  the  preceding  line.  Now 
a  study  of  the  LXX  suggests  that  instead  of  '  to  bring  in  ever- 
lasting righteousness '  we  should  read  '  to  set  up  (rr?)  everlasting 
righteousness,'  which  in  this  case  would  mean  *  to  set  up  the 
righteous  worship  for  ever,'  which  had  been  overthrown  by 
Antiochus  Epiphanes.  Thus  this  phrase  would  be  the  counter- 
part of  '  to  set  up  the  transgression  '  in  viii.  13,  xii.  11.  Next,  if 
we  are  right  in  taking  '  to  seal  vision  and  prophet '  as  meaning  '  to 
ratify  and  confirm  the  vision,'  then  this  phrase  should  come  at 
the  close  of  the  verse. 

Thus  lines  two,  three,  and  four  would  read  : 

*  To  finish  the  transgression  and  to  set  up  everlasting  righteous- 
ness, 
And  to  make  an  end  of  sins  and  to  purge  away  iniquity, 
And  to  anoint  a  most  holy  place  and  to  seal  vision  and  prophet.* 
Taken   thus  the  action  in  the  verse  is  clear  and  progressive. 
Towards  the  expiration  of  the  seventy  years  the  heathen  worship 
in  the  Temple  will  be  brought  to  an  end,  the  true  worship  of  God 
restored  :  then  sin  and  iniquity  will  be  purged  away,  the  Temple 
rededicated  and  the  vision  of  the  prophet  fulfilled. 

This  restoration  is,  of  course,  hj'pothetical,  but  it  has  much  in  its 
favour  in  that  by  a  simple  rearrangement  of  the  clauses  we  arrive 
at  a  text  which  gives  an  admirable  meaning  in  harmony  with  the 
rest  of  the  book.  In  my  larger  Commentary  this  passage  will  be 
dealt  with  exhaustively. 

to  make  an  end  of  sins.  So  the  Hebrew  margin  {Q^ri)  and 
54  MSS.  The  Hebrew  text  {K'tib)  and  Theod.  have  '  to  seal  up 
sins,'  which  is  explained  as  'restraining  sins.' 

to  make  reconciliation  for.  Since  the  context  here  refers 
to  God,  we  should  render  Ukappir  as  in  the  margin,  'to  purge 
away.'  If  the  context  referred  to  the  priest,  we  should  translate 
'  to  make  reconciliation  for.'  The  meaning  of  the  verb  differs 
according  to  its  subject, 

•verlasting"  rigliteonsness.      This  expression,  which  doeSs 


io6  DANIEL  9.  25 

35  and  ^prophecy,  and  to  anoint  ^  the  most  holy.    Know 

therefore  and  discern,   that  from  the  going  forth  of  the 

commandment  to  restore  and  to  build  Jerusalem  unto 

c  the  anointed  one,  the  prince,  shall  be  ^  seven  weeks : 

and  threescore  and  two  weeks,  it  shall  be  built  again, 

*  Heb.  prophet,  ^  Or,  a  most  holy  place         '^  Or,  Messiah, 

the  prince      Or,   an  anointed  one,  a  prince  ^  Or,  seven 

2veeks,and  threescore  and  two  weeks  :  it  shall  be  ifc. 

not  occur  elsewhere,  is  taken  to  mean  the  eternal  righteousness 
of  the  Messianic  Kingdom.  But  another  meaning  is  possible. 
See  note  above. 

to  seal  up  vision  and  prophet,  (So  Hebrew  and  marg. 
R.V.).  Rather:  'to  seal  vision  and  prophet,'  i.e.  to  con- 
firm the  vision  of  the  prophet.  Cf.  John  iii.  33,  vi.  27.  The 
metaphor  is  taken  from  affixing  a  seal  to  a  document  to  attest  its 
genuineness  (i  Kings  xxi.  8).  The  LXX  and  the  Syr.  Hexaplaric 
Version  read  avvTfKfaOrjvai  to.  updfMiTa — a  fact  which  shows  that 
the  LXX  read  not  onnb  but  cnnb,  i.  e.  *  to  fulfil  the  vision.'  This 
sense  is  decidedly  better.     The  LXX  omits  *  and  prophet.' 

25-27.   The  resolution  0/  the  'jo  years  into  periods  of'],  62,  and  i. 

25.  the  gfoingf  forth  of  the  commandment.  Read  '  word,' 
as  in  ver.  23.  The  text  refers  to  the  word  of  God  spoken  by 
Jeremiah  (xxx.  18,  xxxi.  38  sq.). 

The  date  implied  by  these  words  should  be  604  b.  c.  (i.  e.  from 
Jer.  XXV.  II  sq.  combined  with  xxv.  i),  or  596  B.  c.  (from  Jer. 
xxix.  10).  But  the  writer  does  not  think  of  these  dates  but 
makes  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  the  point  of  departure,  i.  e. 

586  B.  C. 

to  restore  and  to  "build,  i.  e.  to  bring  back  exiles  and  build  ; 
cf.  Jer.  xxix.  10.  Bevan  proposes,  by  a  change  of  punctuation  in 
one  letter,  to  read  *  to  rcpeople  and  build.' 

unto  the  anointed  one.  Read  *  unto  an  anointed  one.' 
The  prince  here  referred  to  is,  as  Eusebius,  Gratz,  Bevan,  Marti, 
and  others  hold,  the  high-priest,  Lev.  iv.  3,  5,  16,  vi.  15, — '  the 
anointed  priest.'  The  word  '  prince  '  is  applied  to  the  high-priest 
in  ver.  26  and  xi.  22.  The  first  seven  weeks,  therefore,  come  to 
a  close  with  the  restoration  of  the  Jewish  worship  {circa  538) 
under  Jeshua  the  son  of  Jozadak  Ezra  iii.  2),  the  first  high-priest 
after  the  return  from  the  Exile,  Hag.  i.  i,  Zech.  iii.  i.  Others 
think  that  Cyrus  is  here  meant,  but  this  is  less  likely. 
Thus  the  seven  weeks  extend  from  586  to  538  B.C. 

threescore  and  two  weeks,  i.e.  during  this  period.  On 
this  period  see  note  on  verses  26-27. 


DANIEL  9.  26  107 

with  street  and  moat,  even  in  troublous  times.     And  26 
after  the  threescore  and  two  weeks  shall  the  anointed  one 

street  and  moat.  Rather  emending  ynn  into  pn  with 
Bevan  and  the  Peshitto  we  should  render  '  with  square  and 
street.'  The  first  word  (lim)  should  not  be  rendered  'street.* 
It  means  simply  'a  broad  place.'  The  two  words  are  found  in 
parallelism  in  Prov.  i.  20,  vii.  12,  Isa.  xv.  3. 

even  in  troublous  times.  The  text  here  is  corrupt  and 
these  words  do  not  belong  to  this  verse  but  to  the  beginning  of 
the  next.  The  right  text  has  been  preserved  in  the  LXX  nal  nard. 
cvvT(\ciav  Kaipwv  =  ZT^'sri  yp2"i  (so  also  the  Peshitto),  the  first 
word  of  which  is  corrupted  in  the  Massoretic  into  pii'3.  Hence 
we  should  here  read  '  and  at  the  end  of  the  times '  and  transfer 
this  clause  to  the  beginning  of  the  next  verse,  as  Bevan,  followed 
by  von  Gall,  Marti,  and  others,  has  pointed  out. 

26-27.  ^^^  Seventh  Week — 171-164  B.C.  Since  the  seventh 
week  must  embrace  the  years  171-164  a  difficulty  arises  as  to  the 
terminus  a  quo  of  the  62  weeks.  In  the  notes  on  the  preceding 
verse  we  found  that  the  first  seven  weeks  came  to  a  close  in  the 
year  538  b.  c.  But  from  538  to  171  b.  c.  there  is  an  interval  not  of 
434  years  (i.  e.  62  weeks  of  years)  but  only  of  367.  In  other  words, 
there  is  an  error  of  67  years.  Some  scholars  have  thought  to 
surmount  this  difficulty  by  making  the  first  seven  weeks  of  the  6a 
weeks  to  run  parallel  with  the  first  seven  weeks  of  the  70  weeks, 
i.  e.  586-538  B.C.  But  this  interpretation  fails  to  explain  the 
anomaly.  Of  the  other  explanations  off'ered  the  best  is  that 
supported  by  Graf,  Noldeke,  and  Bevan,  which  is  that  the  author 
of  Daniel  followed  a  wrong  computation.  The  materials  for  an 
exact  chronology  from  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  586  B.C.  to 
the  establishment  of  the  Seleucid  period  in  312  B.C.,  were  not  at 
the  disposal  of  a  Jew  living  in  Palestine,  nor  apparently  of  any 
Jew.  For  Schiirer  {Gesch.  des  Jild.  Volkes^,lll.  iZg  sq. '.  Eng. 
Transl.  II.  iii.  54')  has  shown  that  dates  covering  this  period  which 
are  given  by  professed  historians  of  Judaism,  such  as  Josephus 
and  the  Egyptian  Jew  Demetrius  {Jlornit  ante  200  e.c),  are  un- 
trustworthy in  the  way  of  excess,  as  in  our  text,  and  that  the 
excess  in  Demetrius  is  almost  exactly  that  in  Daniel.  Thus  the 
latter  reckons  573  3'ears  as  having  elapsed  between  the  Captivity 
of  the  Ten  Tribes  (722  B.C.)  and  the  accession  of  Ptolemy  IV  in 
222  B.C.  The  true  interval  is  here  over-estimated  by  73  years. 
From  these  facts  Schiirer  reasonably  concludes  that  Daniel  is 
here  following  the  chronology  current  in  his  time  on  these 
matters. 

26.  the  threescore  and  two  weeks.     See  the  preceding  note. 

the  anointed  one  be  cut  off.     Read  *  an  anointed  one,  &c.' 

L 


To8  DANIEL  9.  26 

be  cut  off,  and  *  shall  have  nothing  :  and  the  people  of  the 
prince  that  shall  come  shall  destroy  the  city  and  the  sanc- 
tuary ;  and  ^his  end  shall  be  with  a  flood,  and  even  unto 

*  Or,  there  shall  be  none  belonging  to  hint 
''Or,  the  end  thereof 

The  anointed  one  is  the  high-priest  Onias  III,  who  was  removed 
from  the  high-priesthood  in  175  B.C.  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes  for 
a  bribe  of  440  talents  of  silver  offered  by  Menelaus  the  brother  of 
Onias,  and  was  assassinated  according  to  2  Mace.  iv.  35-37  at  the 
instigation  of  the  same  brother  in  171  b.c.  This  murder  of  the 
lawful  high-priest  evidently  made  a  great  impression  at  the  time. 
It  is  referred  to  also  in  i  Enoch  xc.  8,  where  see  my  note. 

and  shall  liave  nothing'  (i.  e.  V7  »'«"i).  This  is  the  ques- 
tionable rendering  of  an  uncertain  text.  Neither  the  LXX  nor 
Theod.  supports  it.  The  former  implies  i2rNi  and  should  be 
rendered  'and  he  shall  cease  to  be'  :  the  latter  implies  '•o  "vi  ]'hi 
=  *and  that  without  judgement.' 

and  the  people  of  the  prince  that  shall  .  .  .  sanctuary. 
The  text  as  it  stands  would  refer  to  the  forces  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  who  made  a  sport  of  Jerusalem,  setting  it  on  fire  and 
laying  low  its  houses  and  walls  (i  Mace.  i.  31,  32,  38).  The 
word  'am  (cr)  would  in  this  case  mean  soldiers  as  in  a  Sam. 
X.  13,  &c.  But  this  text  obliges  us  to  take  n':3  'prince'  in  a 
different  sense  from  what  it  has  in  vcr.  25  where  it  refers  to  the 
Jewish  high-priest.  This  difficulty,  of  course,  is  not  a  great  one 
but  it  is  of  weight  that  one  MS.  and  the  five  chief  versions  are 
against  this  text.  Instead  of  D?  they  presuppose  cr.  Further, 
the  verb  n'H^^  (=' shall  destroy')  should,  with  Bevan,  Marti, 
and  others,  be  punctuated  nnir"_  = 'shall  be  destroyed.'  Thus 
we  have  '  and  the  city  and  the  sanctuary  shall  be  destroyed 
together  with  a  prince,' i.e.  Onias  III.  With  the  supercession 
and  death  of  Onias  III  began  the  ruin  of  the  city  and  sanctuary 
through  the  Hellenizing  parties  in  Jerusalem. 

the  prince  that  shall  come  .  .  .  and  his  end  shall  be. 
The  LXX  presents  a  better  form  of  text.  Instead  of  i^^i  N::n  we 
should  read  ypn  Nr  with  the  LXX  i:al  rj^fi  tj  avvriXda,  'and  the 
end  shall  come,'  *  The  end  '  here  is  the  last  period  of  affliction  ; 
cf.  viii,  17,  19. 

the  end  shall  come  with  a  flood  (emended  translation). 
These  words  introduce  the  seventieth  and  last  week,  with  which 
the  first  clause  of  the  next  verse  also  deals. 

with  a  flood.  Cf.  Nah.  i.  8,  *  with  an  overrunning  flood,  &c.,' 
Jer.  xlvii.  2.     The  word  recurs  in  xi.  22.     It  is  used  here  figura- 


DANIEL  9.  27  109 

the  end  shall  be  war;  desolations  are  determined.     And  27 

he  shall  make  a  firm  covenant  with  many  for  one  week  : 

and  ^  for  the  half  of  the  week  he  shall  cause  the  sacrifice 

and   the  ^  oblation  to  cease  :  and  ^  upon  the  wing  of 

*  Or,  I'tt  the  midst  of  ^  Or,  tneal  offentig 

*^  Or,  upon  the  pinnacle  q,  aoominations  shall  be  &c. 

tively  of  the  destroying  flood  of  war.    The  war  is  that  of  Antiochus 
against  the  Saints. 

desolations  are  determined.  Rather  *  that  which  is  deter- 
mined ot  desolations.'  Marti  conjectures  that  this  clause  is  a 
dittograph  of  the  closing  words  of  the  next  verse.  This  is 
possible.     It  may  be  a  gloss  on  the  preceding  clause. 

27.  he  shall  make  a  firm  covenant  with  many.  There  are 
undoubted  difficulties  connected  with  this  rendering  which  pre- 
supposes Antiochus  Epiphanes  to  be  the  subject  of  the  verb.  If 
the  interpretation  of  the  preceding  verses  is  correct,  then  An- 
tiochus has  not  hitherto  been  referred  to  in  24-26.  In  the  next 
place  in  the  only  other  passage,  Ps.  xii.  5,  where  the  verb  ("i'Z:rt) 
occurs  in  the  hiphil  as  here,  it  means  'to  be  strong'  or  'show 
oneself  strong.'  And  finally  the  word  'covenant'  is  not  used 
elsewhere  in  this  sense  in  Daniel,  where  it  means  practically 
'  religion  '  or  '  the  practice  of  religion.'  Various  emendations  have 
been  proposed.  Bevan  suggests  lEin"!,  and  renders:  'and  the 
covenant  shall  be  annulled  for  the  many,'  i.e.  there  shall  be 
a  period  of  general  apostasy.  Marti  develops  a  conjecture  of 
Gratz  and  reads  lirni  'and  the  covenant  (i.e.  the  practice  of 
religion)  shall  come  to  end  for  the  many.' 

and  for  the  half  of  the  week,  &c.  This  clause  and  the  rest 
of  the  verse  deal  with  the  second  half  of  the  last  week,  which 
embraces  the  period  from  the  15th  of  Chisleu  168  to  the  25th  of 
Chisleu  165  B.C.  (see  i  Mace.  i.  54  and  iv.  52  sq.},  during  which 
period  (see  viii.  14)  the  Temple  services  were  suspended.  But  this 
period  does  not  coincide  with  the  three  and  a  half  j'ears,  vii.  qg, 
xii.  7,  during  which  the  entire  persecution  vi^as  to  last.  This 
period  may  have  begun  with  the  expedition  of  Apollonius  against 
Jerusalem  earlier  in  168  '^i  Mace.  i.  29,  2  Mace.  v.  24\  On  the 
two  different  periods  given  in  xii.  ii,  12,  see  notes  in  loc. 

cause  ...  to  cease.  With  the  LXX  and  Theod.  we  should 
read  niii"  instead  of  n^r:;']  and  translate  'the  sacrifice  and  the 
oblation  shall  cease.'  The  sacrifice  and  oblation  include  all 
kinds  of  sacrifice  bloody  and  unbloody.  Cf.  i  Sam.  ii.  29,  iii.  14, 
Ps.  xl.  7. 

upon  the  wing'  of  ahominations.     This  unintelligible  phrase 

L  2 


no  DANIEL  9.  27 

abominations  shall  come  one  that  maketh  desolate ;  and 
even  unto  the  consummation,  and  that  determined,  shall 
ivrath  be  poured  out  upon  the  ^  desolator. 

*  Or,  desolate 

(ri;3  br)  has  been  emended  by  van  Lennep,  Bevan,  Kuenen, 
Kamphausen,  Driver,  and  others  into  "1:3  bi'  =in  its  stead,  i.e. 
instead  of  the  daily  sacrifice.  The  whole  clause  then  would  run  : 
'and  in  its  stead  shall  be  the  abomination.' 

of  abominations  shall  come  one  that  maketh  desolate. 
A  comparison  of  xi.  31,  xii.  11  makes  it  clear  that  the  reference  in 
the  text  is  to  the  heathen  altar  set  up  by  Antiochus  (cf.  viii.  12, 
13),  and  that  for  dom'O  □^sipc'  we  should  read  DO\ro  yipc  as 
in  xi.  31.  We  should  thus  render:  'And  in  its  stead  shall  be 
the  abomination  that  maketh  desolate.'  The  LXX  and  Theod. 
presuppose  'and  upon  the  holy  thing  (i.e.  the  Jewish  altar)  shall 
be  (set  up)  the  abomination,  &c.' 

and  even  unto  the  consummation,  &c.  Rather,  '  and  that 
until  the  consummation  and  that  which  is  determined  be  poured 
upon  the  desolator.'  The  phrase  'the  consummation  and  that 
which  is  determined,  (which  is  really  an  hendiadys  == '  the  deter- 
mined consummation')  is  taken  from  Isa.  xxviii.  22. 

I  here  append  for  the  convenience  of  the  reader  the  last  three 
verses  emended  and  translated  as  above  suggested. 

25.  Know  therefore  and  discern  that  from  the  going  forth  of 
the  commandment  to  restore  and  build  Jerusalem, 

Unto  an  anointed  one,  a  prince,  shall  be  seven  weeks  ; 
And  for  threescore  and  two  weeks  it  shall  be  rebuilt  with 
square  and  street. 

26.  And  at  the  end  of  the  times,  after  threescore  and  two 
weeks,  shall  an  anointed  one  be  cut  off  and  that  without  judgement, 

And  the  city  and  the  sanctuary  shall  be  destroj^ed  together 
with  a  prince, 

And  the  end  shall  come  with  a  flood  and  even  unto  the  end 
shall  be  war  (that  which  is  determined  of  desolations\ 

27.  And  the  covenant  shall  come  to  an  end  for  the  many  for 
one  week, 

And  for  the  half  of  the  week  sacrifice  and  oblation  shall  cease, 
And  in  its  stead  shall  be  the  abomination  that  maketh  desolate, 
And  that  until  the  consummation  that  is  doomed  is  poured 
out  upon  the  desolator. 

x — xii.  These  three  chapters  are  to  be  taken  closely  together 
as  forming  one  whole.  They  give  a  survey  of  oriental  history 
from  the  beginning  of  the  Persian  period  down  to  the  time  of  the 
writer.     The  account  grows  steadily  in  definiteness  and  fullness 


DANIEL  10.  I,  2  III 

In  the  third  year  of  Cyrus  king  of  Persia  a  thing  was  10 
revealed  unto  Daniel,  whose  name  was  called  Belteshazzar  ; 
and  the  thing  was  true,  even  a  great  warfare  :  and  he  under- 
stood the  thing,  and  had  understanding  of  the  vision.    In  3 
those  days  I  Daniel  was  mourning  three  whole  weeks. 

as  it  advances  towards  the  close  of  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes,  when  suddenly  it  leaves  the  region  of  history  and  enter; 
on  that  of  prophecy.  Chapter  x  forms  an  introduction  or  pro- 
logue to  xi.  a^'-xii.  After  a  brief  allusion  to  Cyrus  and  his 
successors  xi.  2^\  and  to  Alexander  xi.  3,  4*,  and  the  division  of 
his  empire  xi.  4'',  there  comes  an  account  of  the  Seleucidae  and 
Ptolemies  xi.  5-20,  growing  in  fullness  as  it  nears  the  time  of  the 
writer  and  finally  entering  into  a  detailed  history  of  the  wars  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes  with  Egypt  xi.  21-30,  40-45,  and  the  suffer- 
ings of  the  Jews  under  his  rule  xi.  3o''-39.  Here  our  author 
passes  from  the  domain  of  history  and  predicts  the  death  of 
Antiochus,  xi.  45^  Thereupon  the  w^orst  of  the  final  wars  sets  in 
for  Israel,  from  which  thej'  are  delivered  by  Michael:  the  resur- 
rection follows  and  the  age  of  blessedness  for  the  faithful. 

X.  1.  In  the  third  year  of  Cyrus.  This  is  the  latest  date  in  the 
book.  The  LXX  reads  'in  the  first  3'ear  of  Cyrus.'  The  latter 
may  be  a  later  correction  owing  to  the  introduction  of  i.  20-21 
(see  note  in  loc). 

king*  of  Persia.  This  title  was  used  of  Cyrus  only  before 
his  conquest  of  Babylon.  After  that  event  the  title  of  Cyrus  and 
the  other  reigning  members  of  the  Achaemenidae  was  '  king  of 
Babylon,'  'the  king,'  '  the  great  king,'  'the  king  of  kings,'  &c. 
(^Driver,  Introduction  to  the  Literature  of  the  O.T.,  p.  546«.).  After 
the  fall  of  the  Persian  empire  the  title  king  of  Persia  was  used  of 
its  kings  in  order  to  distinguish  them  from  their  Greek  successors. 

a  thing-,  or  '  a  word  ' :  cf.  ix.  23. 

unto  Daniel.  Daniel  is  here  spoken  of  as  the  third  person : 
cf.  vii.  I. 

Belteshazzar.     See  note  on  i.  7. 

the  thing-  .  .  .  warfare.  Rather  the  word  is  true  and  a 
hard  service,'  that  is  it  involves  great  hardship.  On  this  use  of 
sab'a,  cf.  Isa.  xl.  2,  Job  vii.  i,  xiv.  14. 

understood..  .  understanding  of.   Better  perhaps 'observed 
the  word  and  gave  heed  to.' 

2.  The  ground  for  Daniel's  mourning  and  fasting  are  not  men- 
tioned as  in  ix.  3,  but  from  ver.  12  it  is  clear  that  it  was  his 
concern  for  the  future  destinies  of  Israel.  For  the  vision  that 
follows  the  fasting  as  in  ix.  3  is  a  preparation. 

three   whole    weeks.     The  Hebrew  is   lit.    '  three    weeks, 


112  DANIEL  10.  3-5 

3  I  ate  no  pleasant  bread,  neither  came  flesh  nor  wine  in 
my  mouth,  neither  did  I  anoint  myself  at  all,  till  three 

4  whole  weeks  were  fulfilled.    And  in  the  four  and  twentieth 
day  of  the  first  month,  as  I  was  by  the  side  of  the  great 

5  river,  which  is  ^  Hiddekel,  I  lifted  up  mine  eyes,  and 
looked,  and  behold  a  man  clothed  in  linen,  whose  loins 

*  That  is,   Tigris. 

days'  :   cf.  Gen.  xli.    i,  Deut.  xxi.   13,   a   Sam.  xiii.  23,  xiv.  28, 
Jer.  xxviii.  3, 

3.  pleasant  bread.  This  is  the  opposite  to  *  bread  of  affliction,' 
Deut.  xvi.  3.  The  clauses  *  ate  ...  in  my  mouth  '  appear  in  an 
expanded  form  in  Test.  Reuben,  i.  10. 

neither  did  I  anoint  myself.  In  fasting  all  luxury  was 
avoided,  and  so  anointing  which  was  of  this  nature.  The  omission 
of  anointing  '  was  a  sign  of  mourning,  the  resumption  of  the 
practice  a  sign  that  mourning  was  over,  2  Sam.  xii.  20,  xiv.  a, 
Judith  X.  3  :  cf.  Is.  Ixi.  3,  Eccl.  ix.  8'  {Encyc.  Bib.,  i.  173). 

4.  the  first  month,  that  is  Nisan,  or  as  it  was  earlier  called, 
Abib,  Daniel,  therefore,  with  his  companions  (ver.  7)  kept  this 
fast  in  the  month  to  which  belonged  the  great  festival  of  the 
Passover  (i,  e.  on  the  14th  day)  and  of  the  Unleavened  Bread 
(i5th-2ist; — 'bread  of  affliction,'  which  the  Law  prescribed 
should  be  eaten,  Deut.  xvi.  3. 

the  great  river  [which  is  Hiddekel],  I  have,  with 
Behrmann  and  Marti,  bracketed  the  explanatory  clause  as  a 
mistaken  gloss.  'The  great  river'  is,  according  to  Gen.  xv.  18, 
the  Euphrates,  which  is  also  called  simply  'the  river,'  Gen.  xxxi. 
21  :  cf.  Isa.  vii.  20.  There  can  be  hardly  any  doubt  that  it  is  the 
Euphrates  here  also  that  is  referred  to.  For  Daniel  and  his  com- 
panions were  resident  in  Babylon,  and  Babylon  was  on  the  banks 
of  the  Euphrates,  whereas  the  Hiddekel  was  at  least  fifty  miles 
distant.  The  Hiddekel  is  only  elsewhere  mentioned  once  in  the 
0,T.,  i.  e.  in  Gen.  ii.  14. 

5-9.   The  appearance  0/  the  heavenly  messenger. 

5.  The  vision  follows  the  fast,  as  in  2  Bar.  v.  7  (see  note  in  my 
edition),  ix.  2,  xii.  5,  xxi.  i,  xlvii.  2,  4  Ezra  v.  20,  vi.  35,  ix.  26  sq  , 
xii.  51. 

lifted  up  mine  eyes.     Cf.  viii.  3. 

and  looked,  and  behold.  On  this  and  kindred  forms  of 
apocalyptic  expression  see  the  note  on  iv.  i  in  my  Commentary  on 
Revelation. 

a  man  clothed  in  linen.  The  phrase  is  probably  from 
Ezek.  ix-.  2,  3,  &c.     That  the  linen  garment  represents  the  angelic 


DANIEL  10.  6-8  113 

were  girded  with  pure  gold  of  Uphaz  :  his  body  also  was  6 
like  the  beryl,  and  his  face  as  the  appearance  of  lightning, 
and  his  eyes  as  lamps  of  fire,  and  his  arms  and  his  feet  like 
in  colour  to  burnished  brass,  and  the  voice  of  his  words 
like  the  voice  of  a  multitude.     And  I  Daniel  alone  saw  7 
the  vision  :  for  the  men  that  were  with  me  saw  not  the 
vision  ;  but  a  great  quaking  fell  upon  them,  and  they  fled 
to  hide  themselves.     So  I  was  left  alone,  and  saw  this  8 
great  vision,  and  there  remained  no  strength  in  me :  for 
my  comeliness  was  turned  in  me  into  corruption,  and 


body  as  composed  of  light  (cf.  Ps.  civ.  2)  is  pointed  out  by  Gress- 
mann  {Ursprutig  der  israel.-jiid.  Eschatologie,  344  sqq.). 

pure  gold  of  Uphaz.  The  text  of  the  LXX,  though  corrupt, 
points  to  the  original  form  of  the  text,  i.  e.  *  fine  gold  of  Ophir '  ; 
cf.  Job  xxviii.  16  ;  Isa.  xiii.  12  ;  Ps.  xlv.  9.  So  Ewald  conjectured 
without  the  help  of  the  LXX.  The  word  Uphaz  is  found  else- 
where only  in  Jer.  x.  g,  but  there  it  is  probably  a  corruption  of 
Ophir  :  so  Targ.,  Pesh.,  and  some  MSS.  of  LXX. 

6.  This  verse  was  used  by  the  writer  of  Rev.  i.  i4''-i5. 
beryl.     The  Hebrew  word  is  tarshish  and  is  said  to  be  the 

chrysolite  (so  the  LXX)  or  the  topaz.  See  Bible  Dictionaries,  in  loc. 
his  face  as  the  appearance  of  lightning.     Cf.  Rev.  i.  16, 

*  His  countenance  was  as  the  sun  shineth  in  his  strength.' 

his  eyes  as  lamps  of  fire.     Cf.  Ezek.  i.  13  (R.  V.  marg.), 

*  In  the  midst  of  the  living  creatures  was  an  appearance  .  .  .  like 
the  appearance  of  torches.' 

his  feet  like  in  colour  to  burnished  brass.  From  Ezek, 
i.  7,  *  They  (i.  e.  the  feet  of  the  Cherubim)  sparkled  like  the  colour 
of  burnished  brass.' 

voice  of  a  multitude.     Cf.  Isa.  xiii.  4,  xxxiii.  3. 

7.  Daniel  alone  saw  the  vision  ;  cf.  Acts  ix.  7,  xxi^.  9. 

fled  to  hide  themselves.  The  Hebrew  is  peculiar  here, 
Nnnnn.  We  should  expect  "n'?.  Both  the  Greek  versions  pre- 
suppose n'jnna  —  *  in  alarm  '  or  '  in  haste.' 

8.  With  the  effect  of  the  appearance  of  the  angel  on  the  seer 
cf.  viii.  17. 

there  remained  no  strength  in  me.     Cf.  i  Sam.  xxviii.  20. 

my  comeliness  was  turned  in  me  into  corruption.  Cf. 
V.  9,  vii.  28.  Instead  of  *  in  me'  ("•'??)  read  'upon  me'  or  else 
omit  the  words.  They  represent  a  sort  of  dative  of  advantage  or 
disadvantage;   cf.  ii.   i,  v.  9,  vii.  28.     The  word  'corruption,'  as 


114  DANIEL  10.  9-13 

9  I  retained  no  strength.  Yet  heard  I  the  voice  of  his 
words  ;  and  when  I  heard  the  voice  of  his  words,  then 
was  I  fallen  into  a  deep  sleep  on  my  face,  with  my  face 

10  toward  the  ground.  And,  behold,  a  hand  touched  me, 
which  ^  set  me  upon  my  knees  and  upon  the  palms  of  my 

11  hands.  And  he  said  unto  me,  O  Daniel,  thou  man 
greatly  beloved,  understand  the  words  that  I  speak  unto 
thee,  and  stand  upright ;  for  unto  thee  am  I  now  sent : 
and  when  he  had  spoken  this  word  unto  me,  I  stood 

12  trembling.  Then  he  said  unto  me.  Fear  not,  Daniel ;  for 
from  the  first  day  that  thou  didst  set  thine  heart  to  under- 

*  Or,  set  me  tottering  upon  ifc. 


Driver  points  out,  is  from  the  same  root  as  that  rendered  *  marred ' 
in  Isa.  Hi.  14  (also  of  the  countenance). 

and  I  retained  no  strength.  This  clause  is,  as  Behrmann 
suggests,  most  probably  a  gloss  borrowed  from  ver.  16.  It  is  a 
^veaker  repetition  of  the  earlier  clause  in  this  verse — '  there 
remained  no  strength  in  me.' 

9.  then  was    I   fallen  into   a  deep  sleep,  &c.     Cf.  viii.    18. 
Daniel  loses  consciousness  on  hearing  the  voice. 

on  my  face  [with  my  face].  With  the  LXX  and  the  Pesh. 
the  words  I  have  bracketed  are  to  be  excised.     Cf.  viii.  17,  18. 

10.  Some  scholars  identify  the  angel  in  verses  10  sqq.  with  the 
angel  in  verses  5-6 :  others  regard  them  as  distinct. 

set  me  upon  my  knees.  The  Hebrew  here  is  literally  : 
'caused  me  to  totter  on  my  knees.'  This  is  a  very  outre'  ex- 
pression and  describes  a  no  less  outr^  result  attending  on  the 
touch  of  the  heavenly  hand.  It  is  not  justified  by  Amos  iv.  8. 
Since  the  Greek  versions  differ  the  text  seems  corrupt.  The 
LXX  and  Theod.  read  ^7€t/3e  =  *  awaked.'  Now  since  Daniel  is 
in  a  heavy  sleep,  this  word  is  most  appropriate.  In  the  next 
verse  Daniel  is  set  upon  his  feet.  If  the  Greek  versions  are  right 
we  should  probably  omit  the  words  '  upon  my  knees  and  upon 
the  palms  of  my  hands.' 

11.  man  greatly  "beloved.     See  ix.  23. 

stand  upright.     Cf.  viii.  18,  Ezek.  ii.  1,4  Ezra  v.  15. 
trembling:  the  same  word  as  in  Ezra  x.  9. 

12.  set  thine  heart.     A  late  idiom  occurring  elsewhere  only 
in  Chronicles  (twice)  and  Ecclesiastes  (five  times). 

to  understand,  i.  e.  Israel's  destiny. 


DANIEL  10.  13-15  IIS 

stand,  and  to  humble  thyself  before  thy  God,  thy  words 
were  heard  :  and  I  am  come  for  thy  words'  sake.    But  the  13 
prince  of  the  kingdom  of  Persia  withstood  me  one  and 
twenty  days  ;  but,  lo,  Michael,  one  of  the  chief  princes, 
came  to  help  me :  and  I  ^  remained  there  with  the  kings 
of  Persia.    Now  I  am  come  to  make  thee  understand  what  14 
shall  befall  thy  people  in  the  latter  days:  for  the  vision  is  yet 
for  matiy  days.    And  when  he  had  spoken  unto  me  accord-  15 
"•  Or,  was  not  needed 

humble  thyself.  This  expression  relates  to  the  various 
forms  of  self-denial  accompanying  a  fast,  as  in  Ezra  viii.  21. 
The  cognate  noun  means  'fasting'  as  in  Ezra  ix.  5  and  the 
Mishna. 

13.  prince  of  the  king'dom  of  Persia.  The  doctrine  of 
angelic  patrons  of  the  nations  appears  first  distinctly  in  our  text; 
cf.  verses  20,  21,  xi.  i,  xii.  i.  How  the  idea  arose  does  not 
concern  us  here,  but  it  appears  in  Sirach  xvii.  17,  Deut.  (LXX) 
xxxii.  8,  and  the  number  of  these  angels  was  said  to  be  seventy 
according  to  the  seventy  nations  mentioned  in  Gen.  x.  But  whereas 
Sirach  and  Jubilees  xv.  32  speak  of  God  as  the  immediate  ruler  of 
Israel,  contemporary  and  later  authorities  designate  Michael  as 
the  patron  of  Israel.  The  destinies  of  these  nations  and  their 
angelic  patrons  were  closely  interwoven,  and  no  nation  was 
punished  before  the  fitting  judgement  was  meted  out  to  its 
angelic  patron  ;  cf.  Isa.  xxiv.  21.  See  my  editions  of  i  Enoch  '^, 
pp.  200  sq.,  Jub.  XV.  32  note. 

Michael.  This  angel  is  the  patron  of  Israel.  So  also  in 
r  Enoch  xx.  5,  Test.  Levi  v.  6,  Test.  Dan.  vi.  2  though  in  the 
last  two  passages  a  still  higher  role  is  assigned  to  him.  See  also 
Rev,  xii.  7,  Jude  9. 

I  remained  there  with  the  king's  of  Persia.  The  text  is 
corrupt  here,  and  that  presupposed  by  the  LXX  and  Theod. 
should  be  adopted.  Hence  for  \-i-irii3  we  should  read  vmmn 
and  supply  tc  after  '?^^^*.  Our  text  then  would  run :  '  I  left 
him  alone  there  with  the  prince  of  the  kings  of  Persia.'  So 
Meinhold,  Behrmann,  and  Marti.  The  guardian  angel  of  Israel 
does  not  contend  with  the  kings  of  Persia  but  with  their  guardian 
angel. 

14.  to  make  thee  understand.     Cf.  viii.  16,  ix.  23. 

what  shall  befall  thy  people  in  the  latter  days.  Based  on 
Gen.  xlix.  i. 

the  vision  is  yet  for  many  days.  Rather:  'there  is  yet 
a  vision  for  the  days,'  i.  c.  there  is  yet  another  vision  relating  to 


ii6  DANIEL  10.  16-18 

ing  to  these  words,  I  set  my  face  toward  the  ground,  and 

16  was  dumb.  And,  behold,  one  like  the  similitude  of  the 
sons  of  men  touched  my  lips  :  then  I  opened  my  mouth, 
and  spake  and  said  unto  him  that  stood  before  me,  O  my 
lord,  by  reason  of  the  vision  my  sorrows  are  turned  upon 

17  me,  and  I  retain  no  strength.  For  how  can  the  servant 
of  this  my  lord  talk  with  this  my  lord?  for  as  for  me, 
straightway  there  remained  no  strength  in  me,  neither  was 

18  there  breath  left  in  me.     Then  there  touched  me  again 


the  last  days.  The  LXX  and  Theod.  imply  a  change  of 
punctuation  in  one  of  the  words  :  'the  vision  is  yet  for  days,'  i.  e. 
it  relates  to  a  distant  period  ;  cf.  viii.  26. 

15-xi.  2*.  DanieVs  conversation  with  the  angel. 

16.  The  dumbness  which  came  upon  DanieJ  in  ver.  15  is  here 
removed. 

one  like  the  similitude  of  the  sons  of  men.  Not  therefore 
a  man,  but  an  angel. 

touched  my  lips.  By  this  act  Daniel  is  enabled  to  speak 
with  the  angel ;  cf.  Isa.  vi.  7,  Jer.  i.  9. 

my  sorrows  are  turned  upon  me.  On  the  phrase  cf. 
I  Sam.  iv.  19.  In  Isa.  xxi.  3  the  same  noun  is  used  of  the  prostration 
of  the  seer  caused  by  the  vision. 

retain  no  strength.  Cf.  ver.  8.  We  have  here  a  late 
Hebrew  idiom,  not  occurring  elsewhere  in  the  O.T.  except  in 
X.  8,  xi.  6,  and  four  times  in  Chronicles. 

17.  how  can  the  servant  of  this  my  lord  talk  with  this  my 
lord?  Better  take  the  first  'this'  with  'servant'  where  it  has 
a  contemptuous  force  as  in  i  Sam.  x.  27,  and  the  second  'this' 
with  '  lord'  with  a  honorific  meaning  as  in  Gen.  v.  29(Behrmann 
and  Marti).  The  sense  then  is  '  how  can  so  mean  a  servant  of 
my  lord  talk  with  so  great  a  one  as  my  lord  ? ' 

straightway  there  remained  no  strength  in  me.  Since 
Daniel  had  already  been  deeply  conscious  of  his  weakness,  the 
sense  is  not  quite  satisfactory.  Moreover,  the  Hebrew  phrase 
(nnvo)  translated  'straightway'  means  'from  nov^  on*  and  can 
only  properly  be  used  of  the  present.  Hence  if  we  retain  it  we 
should  translate  :  'from  now  there  remaineth  (or  'will  remain '\ 
&c.'  Since,  however,  the  LXX  here  reads  ■fjaBlvrjaa  =  \-iro,  the 
text  would  mean  :  '  I  shook  :  there  remained.'  Other  emendations 
are  proposed. 

18.  touched  me  again.     Cf.  10,  16. 


DANIEL  10.  19-21  117 

one  like  the  appearance  of  a  man,  and  he  strengthened 
me.  And  he  said,  O  man  greatly  beloved,  fear  not:  19 
peace  be  unto  thee,  be  strong,  yea,  be  strong.  And 
when  he  spake  unto  me,  I  was  strengthened,  and  said, 
Let  my  lord  speak  ;  for  thou  hast  strengthened  me. 
Then  said  he,  Knowest  thou  wherefore  I  am  come  unto  20 
thee?  and  now  will  I  return  to  fight  with  the  prince 
of  Persia  :  and  when  I  go  forth,  lo,  the  prince  of  ^  Greece 
shall  come.     But  I  will  tell  thee  that  which  is  inscribed  ai 

*  Heb.  Javan. 

one  like  the  appearance  of  a  man.  Cf.  ver.  16,  viii.  15, 
Ezek.  i.  13,  14,  &c.  This  angel  also  touched  the  seer  and 
strengthened  him  in  16*,  and  here  appears  to  be  distinct  from  the 
great  angel  described  in  5-6,  who  addressed  Daniel  in  11^,  12-14, 
and  whom  Daniel  addressed  in  16*^,  17,  and  who  again  addressed 
Daniel  in  verses  19-ai. 

19.  he  said.     See  the  preceding  note. 
greatly  beloved.     Cf.  ver.  11. 

be  strong',  yea,  be  strong-.  Since  the  LXX,  Theod.,  Pesh., 
and  Vulg.  presuppose  two  different  words  here  the  text  may  be 
incorrect.  If  so  we  might  with  five  Hebrew  MSS.,  the  LXX, 
and  Theod.  read  'be  strong  and  of  a  good  courage';  cf.  Deut. 
xxxi.  7,  23,  Joshua  i.  6,  &c. 

20.  now  will  Z  return  to  fight  with,  &c.,  i.e.  to  resume  the 
conflict  with  the  prince  of  Persia  (see  ver.  13  . 

when  I  go  forth,  lo,  the  prince  of  Greece  shall  come,  i.  e. 
when  I  have  done  with  the  war  against  Persia,  that  with  Greece 
will  then  begin.  The  Hebrew  verb  for  *go  forth'  here  may  be 
used  in  the  sense  of  *  when  I  am  free  from '  or  *  done  with '  as  in 
I  Sam,  xiv.  41,  Eccles.  vii.  18  (Marti).  Or  with  the  two  verbs 
in  our  text  we  might  compare  2  Kings  xi.  5,  7  where  they  are 
used  of  departure  from  and  entry  on  the  duty  of  keeping  watch. 

2i-xi.  2.  There  are  here  obvious  dislocations  of  and  additions  to 
the  text.  First  of  all  21''  should  follow  imn)ediately  on  20  :  *  When  I 
go  forth,  lo,  the  prince  of  Greece  shall  come,  and  there  is  none  that 
holdeth  with  me  against  these  but  Michael  your  prince.'  Next 
as  regards  21^  this  clause  '  but  I  will  tell  thee  that  which  is 
inscribed  in  the  writing  of  truth'  should  stand  at  the  beginning  of 
xi.  2  instead  of  the  clause  which  appears  there  *  and  now  will  I 
shew  thee  the  truth.'  These  last  words  are  an  addition  to  the 
text,  a  repetition  of  x.  ai%  which  becomes  necessary  through  the 
transposition  of  that  clause. 


ii8  DANIEL  11.  I,  2 

in  the  writing  of  truth :  and  there  is  none  that  *  holdeth 

11  with  me  ^  against  these,  but  Michael  your  prince.    And  as 

for  me,  in  the  first  year  of  Darius  the  Mede,  I  stood  up  to 

confirm  and  strengthen  him. 

3      And  now  will  I  shew  thee  the  truth.    Behold,  there 

shall  stand  up  yet  three  kings  in  Persia ;  and  the  fourth 

shall  be  far  richer  than  they  all :  and  when  he  is  waxed 

*  Heb.  strengtheneth  himself.         ^  Or,  concerning  these  things 

But  the  chief  difficulty  lies  in  xi.  i.  The  date  in  the  words  'in 
the  first  year  of  Darius  the  Mede,  I  stood  up  to  confirm  and 
strengthen  him '  does  not  suit  an  account  of  the  wars  in  heaven 
amongst  the  angelic  princes,  but  as  Robertson  Smith,  Behrmann^ 
Marti,  &c.,  have  pointed  out,  has  been  wrongly  introduced  into 
the  text  here  after  the  analogy  of  vii.  i,  viii.  i,  ix.  i,  x.  i.  The 
LXX  and  Theod.  tried  to  escape  the  difficulty  by  correcting 
Darius  into  Cyrus.  Next  the  LXX  shows  that  the  phrase  '  and  as 
for  me '  is  not  original  and  both  the  LXX  and  the  Pesh.  represent 
the  speaker  as  receiving  help  and  not  as  giving  it — in  other  words, 
the  latter  half  of  xi.  i  read  *  stood  up  to  confirm  and  strengthen  me/ 
I  cannot  enter  more  fully  here  into  the  criticism  of  this  passage, 
but  will  now  give  the  text  as  most  probably  it  stood  originally. 

2o'^-xi.  2.  '  When  I  go  forth,  lo,  the  prince  of  Greece  shall 
come,  21^  and  there  is  none  that  holdeth  with  me  against  these, 
but  Michael  your  prince,  xi.  i^  who  standeth  up  to  confirm  and 
strengthen  me.  2.  But  I  will  tell  thee  that  which  is  inscribed  in 
the  writing  of  truth.     Behold  there  shall  stand  up  yet,  &c.' 

xi.  s'^-xii.  4.  The  revelation  given  to  the  seer.  See  p.  1 10  sq.  for  the 
summary.  2**.  The  four  kings.  Our  author  seems  to  know  only 
four  Persian  kings;  see  vii.  6.  Who  are  these  four  kings? 
Since  Cyrus  is  still  reigning,  he  is  necessarily  included  in  the 
four.  Cyrus,  therefore,  is  the  first  of  the  four.  It  is  no  less  clear 
that  the  fourth  referred  to  in  this  verse  is  Xerxes  who  invaded 
Greece.  But  who  are  the  second  and  third.  The  second  appears 
to  be  Cambj'ses  (529-522  b.  c.)  and  the  third  Darius  Hj'staspis 
(522-485  B.C.).  In  this  case  the  usurping  Pseudo-Smerdis  would 
be  omitted.  But  Bevan  and  others  think  that  the  four  kings 
mentioned  in  Ezra  iv.  5-7  are  here  referred  to,  but  in  the  order 
Cyrus,  Darius  Hystaspis,  Artaxerxes,  Xerxes,  these  being  the 
only  four  names  of  Persian  kings  that  occur  in  the  O.  T.,  which 
was  most  probably  the  principal  source  of  information  accessible 
to  the  writer.  The  reckoning  of  Xerxes  as  the  successor  of" 
Artaxerxes  would  thus  be  one  of  the  historical  errors  of  the  book^ 


DANIEL  11.  3-5  119 

strong  through  his  riches,  "  he  shall  stir  np  all  against 
the  realm  of  ^  Greece.  And  a  mighty  king  shall  stand  up,  3 
that  shall  rule  with  great  dominion,  and  do  accord- 
ing to  his  will.  And  when  he  shall  stand  up,  his  4 
kingdom  shall  be  broken,  and  shall  be  divided  toward 
the  four  winds  of  heaven ;  but  not  to  his  posterity,  nor 
according  to  his  dominion  wherewith  he  ruled  ;  for  his 
kingdom  shall  be  plucked  up,  even  for  others  beside 
these.     And  the  king  of  the  south  c  shall  be  strong,  and  5 

*  Or,  all  tills  shall  stir  up  the  realm  ^  Heb.  Javan. 

^  Or,  shall  be  strong ;  but  on&  of  his  princes  shall  be  &c. 

shall  stir  up  all  against,  &c.  The  Hebrew  is  here  most 
unusual,  and  is  without  the  support  of  any  of  the  versions.  But 
though  the  original  form  of  the  text  is  uncertain  the  sense  intended 
is  clear.  The  text  refers  of  course  to  Xerxes'  expedition  against 
Greece,  which  ended  in  his  defeat  at  Salamis,  480  b.  c. 

the  realm.  We  should  perhaps  with  Theod.  and  the  Pesh. 
read  'the  kingdoms.'  This  would  give  a  truer  description  of 
Greece.  Though  the  LXX  diverges  from  both  readings  it  practically 
supports  the  latter. 

3.  Alexander  the  Great  (336-323  B.  c). 

do  according'  to  his  will.     Cf.  16,  36,  viii.  4. 

4.  when  he  shall  stand  up.  "nor^  is  here  certainly  to  be 
emended,  with  Graetz,  according  to  the  parallel  passage  in  viii. 
8,  into  101*1-3  '  when  he  became  strong.'  The  point  of  the  writer 
is  that  the  moment  Alexander  achieved  his  greatest  success  he 
was  cut  down. 

shall  be  broken  .  .  .  toward  the  four  winds  of  heaven. 
Cf.  the  similar  language  in  viii.  8  about  Alexander.  On  the  four 
kingdoms  that  rose  on  the  ruins  of  Alexander's  empire  see  the 
note  on  viii.  8. 

not  to  his  posterity.  Alexander,  the  posthumous  son  of 
Alexander  by  Roxana  his  wife,  and  Herakles,  his  illegitimate  son 
by  his  mistress  Barsine,  were  both  murdered  some  thirteen  years 
after  the  death  of  Alexander. 

nor  according^  to  his  dominion,  &c.     Cf.  viii.  22. 

even  (better  'and')  for  others  beside  these,  i.e.  'the 
dynasties  which  arose  in  Cappadocia,  Armenia,  and  other  countries 
during  the  century  and  a  half  that  followed  upon  the  death  of 
Alexander '  (Bevan).  The  '  these  '  above  mentioned  are  Alex- 
ander's generals. 

5-20.  The  Ptolemies   and    the  Seleucidae  before   the   time   of 


120  DANIEL  11.  6 

one  of  his  princes  ;  and  he  shall  be  strong  above  him,  and 
have  dominion ;  his  dominion  shall  be  a  great  dominion. 
6  And  at  the  end  of  years  they  shall  join  themselves  together ; 
and  the  daughter  of  the  king  of  the  south  shall  come  to  the 
king  of  the  north  to  make  «^an  agreement :  but  she  shall 

*  Or,  equitable  conditions 

Antiochus  Epiphanes  — the  two  dynasties  which  contended  for 
the  possession  of  Palestine,  which  was  dominated  mainly  by  the 
former  during  the  third  century  B.C.  In  198  B.C.  it  passed  under 
the  control  of  the  Ptolemies  at  the  battle  of  Paneion. 

5.  king^  of  the  soutli,  i.e.  the  king  of  Egypt,  Ptolemy  I,  son 
of  Lagus,  one  of  Alexander's  ablest  generals,  who  secured  Egypt 
on  the  partition  of  Alexander's  empire  and  ruled  it  as  satrap  from 
322  to  306  B.C.,  when  he  assumed  the  royal  title.  He  reigned  as 
king  from  306  to  285  b.  c. 

one  of  his  princes,  i.e.  Seleucus  Nicator  I,  who  was  originally 
satrap  of  Babylon,  321-316  b.  c.  ;  was  deprived  of  his  satrapy  by 
Antigonus,  but  recovered  it  by  the  aid  of  Ptolemy  in  312  b.  c.  The 
era  of  the  Seleucidae,  which  was  used  subsequently  by  the  Jews, 
was  determined  by  this  event.  In  306  b.  c.  Seleucus  assumed  the 
title  of  king. 

one  of  his  princes ;  and  he  shall  be  strong*.  Better  read 
with  LXX  and  Theod.  'one  of  his  princes  shall  be  strong.' 

shall  be  strong*  above  him,  i.e.  Seleucus  will  be  stronger 
than  Ptolemy.  After  the  decisive  victory  over  Antigonus  at 
Ipsus  (301  B.C.)  Seleucus  received  vast  accessions  of  territory,  and 
his  empire  became  the  most  powerful  of  those  which  had  been 
formed  out  of  the  dominions  of  Alexander. 

6.  Ptolemy  II,  Philadelphtts,  285-247  B.C.,  and  AniioduiS  II, 
Theos,  261-246  B.C.  Antiochus  I,  Soter,  the  son  and  successor  of 
Seleucus  I,  is  here  left  out  of  account. 

About  the  year  248  b. c.  Ptolemy  II  gave  his  daughter  Berenice 
in  marriage  to  Antiochus  II  on  the  condition  that  he  should  put 
away  his  wife  Laodice  and  deprive  his  two  sons,  Seleucus  and 
Antiochus,  of  the  right  of  succession.  On  the  death  of  Ptolemy 
two  years  later,  Antiochus  II  divorced  Berenice  and  took  back 
Laodice.  The  latter,  distrusting  the  constancy  of  Antiochus, 
poisoned  him  and  procured  the  murder  of  Berenice,  her  child  and 
attendants. 

but  she  shall  not  retain  the  strength  of  her  arm.  This 
would  mean  that  Berenice  would  not  ultimately  prevail  against 
Laodice.  Better  with  Graetz,  Bevan  and  others  render  '  but  this 
support  shall  not  retain  strength.'     Cf.  2  Chron.  xiii.  20. 


DANIEL  11.  7,  8  121 

not  retain  the  strength  ot  her  arm  ;  neither  shall  he  stand, 
nor  his  arm ;  but  she  shall  be  given  up,  and  they  that 
brought  her,  and  he  that  begat  her,  and  he  thatstrengthened 
her  in  those  times.  But  out  of  a  shoot  from  her  roots  shall  7 
one  stand  up  in  his  *  place,  which  shall  come  ^  unto  the 
army,  and  shall  enter  into  the  fortress  of  the  king  of  the 
north,  and  shall  deal  against  them,  and  shall  prevail :  and  8 
also  their  gods,  with  their  c  molten  images,  and  wiih  their 
goodly  vessels  of  silver  and  of  gold,  shall  he  carry  captive 

*  Or,  Ojfficg  ^  Or,  against  '^  Or,  princes 


neither  shall  he  stand,  nor  his  arm.  Here  Theod.  and  the 
Vulg.  appear  to  be  right.  For  irnii  we  should  read  iyiT  *  his 
seed.'  Thus  we  have  *  neither  shall  his  seed  stand,'  i.  e.  '  endure,' 
referring  to  the  children  of  Antiochus  by  Berenice. 

she  (Berenice)  shall  he  given  up.  This  meaning  of  p:n 
is  unexampled.  The  true  text  of  viii.  12  does  not  support  it  nor 
any  other  passage.  We  should  probably  read  'rn:n  'she  shall 
be  rooted  up.'  This  harmonizes  well  with  the  metaphor  in  the 
preceding  clause.  We  should  observe  also  that  the  same  metaphor 
is  used  in  ver.  7. 

they  that  hrouefht  her,  i.e.  her  suite. 

he  that  begfat  her.  The  extraordinary  nn'<>n  should  with 
von  Gall  and  Marti  be  emended  into  rrib'   = '  her  son.' 

he  that  strengthened  her.  Better  '  he  that  got  possession 
of  her,*  i.e.  her  husband. 

7-9.  Ptolemy  III  {Euergetes  7),  247-222  B.C.,  and  Sehucus  II, 
Ca/linicus,  246-226  B.C.  Ptolemy  III,  with  a  view  to  avenging  the 
murder  of  his  sister  Berenice,  invaded  the  northern  kingdom, 
seized  Seleucia,  the  port  of  Antioch,  and  overran  the  greater  part 
of  Syria  and  Babylonia,  and  returned  to  Eg\'pt  with  an  immense 
booty.  Two  years  later  Seleucus  Callinicus  invaded  Egypt  but 
sustained  an  overwhelming  defeat  and  returned  with  only  a  hand- 
ful of  his  troops  (240  b.c). 

7.  one,  i.e.  Ptolemy  III,  brother  of  Berenice. 

shall  come  unto  the  army,  i.e.  take  the  command  of  his 
forces  against  Syria.  But  this  is  unlikely.  We  should  expect 
rather  '  shall  come  with  an  army  '  as  in  ver.  13.  Better,  as  in  the 
margin,  render  :  '  shall  march  against  the  (Syrian)  army.' 

8.  According  to  Jerome  Ptolemy  brought  back  to  Egypt  the 
statues  of  the  Egyptian  gods  carried  off  by  Cambyses  280  years 


122  DANIEL  11.  9-ir 

into  Egypt ;  and  he  shall  ^  refrain  some  years  from  the  king 
9  of  the  north.    And  he  shall  come  into  the  realm  of  the  king 

10  of  the  south,  but  he  shall  return  into  his  own  land.  And 
his  sons  shall  war,  and  shall  assemble  a  multitude  of  great 
forces,  b  which  shall  come  on,  and  overflow,  and  pass 
through  :  and  ^  they  shall  return  and  war,  even  to  his 

11  fortress.  And  the  king  of  the  south  shall  be  moved  with 
choler,  and  shall  come  forth  and  fight  with  him,  even  with 
the  king  of  the  north  :  and  he  shall  set  forth  a  great  multi- 

'  Or,  cotttmue  more  years  than  ifc.  ^  Or,  and  he 

*=  Or,  he 

earlier.     On  this  ground  his  subjects  conferred  on  him  the  title 
Euergetes. 

refrain  .  .  .  from,  i.e.  from  attacking.  Cf.  Gen.  xxix.  35, 
2  Kings  iv.  6.  But  some  scholars  support  the  rendering  in  the 
margin, 

9.  See  note  on  7-9. 

10-12.  The  next  ten  verses  deal  mainly  with  the  times  of 
Antiochus  III  the  Great.  When  Seleucus  Callinicus  died,  his 
elder  son,  Seleucus  Ceraunos,  became  king,  but  after  a  reign  of  three 
years  (226-223  b.  c. )  was  murdered  during  a  campaign  in  Asia 
Minor.  He  was  succeeded  by  Antiochus  III  the  Great,  223-187 
B.C.  Antiochus,  soon  after  his  accession,  attacked  Palestine,  then 
subject  to  Egypt,  and  in  the  course  of  two  campaigns  conquered 
the  greater  part  of  it.  But  in  217  b.  c.  Ptolemy  met  Antiochus  at 
Raphia  and  defeated  him  with  great  loss.  Palestine  was  then 
reannexed  to  the  empire  of  the  Ptolemies. 

10.  Ms  sons  shall  war,  i.  e.  Seleucus  Ceraunos  and  An- 
tiochus III. 

shall  come  on.  Thirteen  MSS.  and  the  LXX  give  the  reading 
'shall  attack  him,'  i.e.  the  king  of  Egypt. 

overflow,  and  pass  through.     From  Isa.  viii.  8. 

shall  return.  Either  into  winter  quarters  in  Ptolemais,  or, 
after  wintering  in  Ptolemais,  to  the  campaign  against  Ptolemy  in 
217  B.C. 

his  fortress.  Probably  Gaza,  the  strongest  fortress  of  Pales- 
tine on  the  south.  Driver  calls  attention  to  the  play  on  Gaza 
(nt;)  in  the  word  for  fortress  (mro). 

11.  he  shall  set  forth  a  great  multitude,  <&c.  These  words 
are  taken  in  two  ways.  '  He  (Antiochus,  shall  raise  a  great 
multitude  and  it  shall  be  given  into  his  (Ptolemy's)  hands.'     This 


DANIEL  11.  1.-14  123 

tilde,  and  ihe  multitude  shall  be  given  into  his  hand.    And  12 
the  multitude  shall  «  be  lifted  up,  and  his  heart  shall  be 
exalted :  and  he  shall  cast  down  tens  of  thousands,  but 
he  shall  not  prevail.     And  the  king  of  the  north  shall  13 
return,  and  shall  set  forth  a  multitude  greater  than  the 
former ;  and  he  shall  come  on  at  the  end  of  the  times, 
even  ^^years,  with  a  great  army  and  with  much  substance. 
iVnd  in  those  times  there  shall  many  stand  up  against  the  14 
king  of  the  south  :  also  the  children  of  the  violent  among 
•'  Or,  be  carried  aivay  ^  Or,  for 

is  the  preferable  rendering.  The  other  is:  'he  (Ptolemy)  shall 
raise  a  great  multitude  and  the  multitude  shall  be  put  under  his 
command.' 

12.  And  the  multitude  shall  he  carried  away  (marg.),  that 
is,  the  army  of  Antiochus.  Another  possible  rendering  is  that  in 
the  text :  'And  the  multitude  shall  be  lifted  up'  or  'lift  itself  up' 
to  attack.  In  this  latter  case  the  army  would  be  that  of  Ptolemy. 
But  the  former  rendering  is  to  be  followed. 

his  heart,  i.e.  Ptolemy's.  This  circumstantial  clause  can 
also  be  referred  to  Ptolemy's  army:   'its  courage  being  raised.' 

shall  cast  down,  &c.,  i.e.  at  Raphia. 

shall  not  prevail.  Ptolem^^  after  his  victory  at  Raphia, 
recovered  Coele  S3'ria,  but  failed  to  follow  up  his  success.  Owing 
to  his  effeminate  and  dissolute  character,  favourable  terms  were 
granted  to  Antiochus. 

1316.  In  205  B.C.,  twelve  years  after  the  battle  of  Raphia, 
referred  to  in  the  preceding  verses,  Ptolemy  Philopator  died, 
leaving  only  one  son,  aged  five  years,  who  succeeded  his  father  as 
Ptolemy  Epiphanes,  205-181  b.c.  Antiochus  seized  on  this 
opportunity  of  attacking  Egypt  and  formed  a  league  with  Philip 
of  Macedon  for  this  purpose.  After  varying  fortunes  Scopas,  the 
general  of  Ptolemy,  recovered  possession  of  Judaea  in  200  B.C., 
but  two  years  later  was  utterly  ciushed  at  Paneas  (Caesarea 
Philippi),  and  forced  to  take  refuge  in  Sidon,  where  he  was 
besieged  and  taken  captive. 

13.  shall  return,  and  shall  set  forth.  Better:  'shall  again 
raise.' 

shall  come  on.  As  in  ver.  10  we  should,  perhaps,  with  the 
LXX  read  'shall  attack  him.' 

14.  shall  many  stand,  &c.,  i.e.  Antiochus,  Philip  of  Macedon, 
and  the  many  insurgents  throughout  the  provinces  of  Egypt. 

the  children  of  the  violent  among*  thy  people,  &'c.    Schlatter 

M 


124  DANIEL  11.  15-17 

thy  people  shall  lift  themselves  up  to  establish  the  vision ; 

15  but  they  shall  fall.  So  the  king  of  the  north  shall  come, 
and  cast  up  a  mount,  and  take  *a  well  fenced  city :  and 
the  arms  of  the  south  shall  not  withstand,  neither  his 
chosen  people,  neither  shall  there  be  any  strength  to 

16  withstand.  But  he  that  cometh  against  him  shall  do 
according  to  his  own  will,  and  none  shall  stand  before 
him :  and  he  shall  stand  in  the  glorious  land,  and  in  his 

17  hand  shall  be  destruction.     And  he  shall  set  his  face  to 

*  Or,  the  fenced  cities 


{ZATIV,,  1894,  145- 151)  is  most  probably  right,  as  Marti  points 
out,  in  identifying  the  '  violent  among  the  people '  with  the 
Tobiadae  and  their  followers.  Ptolemy  alienated  the  affections 
of  the  Jews  by  supporting  Joseph,  the  head  of  this  family,  by 
a  garrison  in  Jerusalem.  This  family  got  hold  of  the  high-priest- 
hood and  robbed  the  nation  by  their  endless  taxation  and  exactions. 
Without  intending  it  they  contributed  by  their  conduct  *to 
establish  the  vision,'  i.  e.  to  bring  about  the  end  foretold,  and  to 
compass  their  own  destruction. 

15^.  shall . . .  cast  up  a  mount  (i.e.  a  mound)  and  take  a  well 
fenced  city.  This  is  Sidon,  where  Scopas  with  100,000  men  had 
taken  refuge,  and  which  Antiochus  captured. 

a  well  fenced  city.  Theod.,  the  Pesh.,  and  Vulg.  read  *  well 
fenced  cities.' 

i5''-i6.  Complete  overthrow  of  the  Egyptian  suzerainty  over 
Syria. 

15*'.  neither  his  chosen  people  ...  to  withstand.  Better 
'  neither  shall  his  chosen  people  have  any  strength  to  withstand.* 
This  involves  the  omission  of  a  vav,  but  the  same  sense  is  attain- 
able without  any  change. 

16.  But  he  (Antiochus)  that  cometh  against  him    Ptolemy), 
stand  in  the  glorious  land,  i.e.  in  Palestine.     See  note  on 

viii.  9, 

and  in  his  hand  shall  be  destruction  directed  either  against 
the  Jews  or  the  Egyptian  garrisons  in  Palestine.  If  for  nb^")  we 
read   n^p^  the  text  runs  '  with  all  of  it  in  his  hand.' 

17.  he  shall  set  his  face,  i.  e.  design,  make  it  his  aim  ;  cf.  Gen. 
xxxi.  21,  a  Kings  xii.  17. 

to  come  with  the  Btrenfifth,  &c.  This  means  that  Antiochus 
will  march  his  entire  forces  against  Ptolemy. 


DANIEL  11.  iS  125 

come  with  the  strength  of  his  whole  kingdom,  ^  and  ^'  up- 
right ones  with  him  ;  and  he  shall  do  /lis  pleasure :  and  he 
shall  give  him  the  daughter  of  women,  ^  to  corrupt  her ; 
but  dshe  shall  not  stand,  neither  be  for  him.    After  this  i' 
shall  he  turn  his  face  unto  the  ®  isles,  and  shall  take 

*  According  to  the  ancient  versions,  and  shall  make  equitable 
conditions   with  him:  and  he  shall  give  ^c.  **  Or,  equitable 

conditions        *^  Or,  to  destroy  it        ^  Or,  //         •=  Or,  coastlands 


and  shall  make  eciuitable  conditions  (or  better  '  an  agree- 
ment' ;  cf.  ver.  6)  with  him  (marg.).  So,  in  accordance  with  the 
LXX,  Theod.,  and  the  Vulg.,  we  should  emend  nuri-i  "iDi""  D'ld 
(='and  upright  ones  with  him,  and  he  shall  do')  unto  DnM"Di 
nfr'  I'D?. 

shall  gfive  him  the  daughter  of  women.  When  Antiochus 
was  obliged  to  abandon  his  designs  on  Egypt  owing  to  the  inter- 
vention of  Rome,  he  made  an  alliance  with  Ptolemy  and  gave  him 
his  daughter  Cleopatra  in  marriage,  with  the  provinces  of  Coelc 
Syria,  Phoenicia,  and  Palestine  as  a  dowry.  This  marriage  was 
carried  out  in  194-193  b.c. 

to  destroy  it  (marg.),  i.e.  Egypt.  The  real  motive  of 
Antiochus  in  giving  his  daughter  to  Ptolemy  was  to  gain  a  footing 
in  Egypt  which  he  could  turn  to  his  own  purposes  when  occasion 
arose.  The  rendering  in  the  text  'to  corrupt  her,'  i.e.  to  bring 
about  her  ruin,  gives  no  tolerable  sense  ;  for  Cleopatra  adopted 
the  cause  of  her  husband,  advised  him  to  maintain  his  alliance 
with  Rome  and  lived  happily  in  Egypt. 

but  it  (marg.)  shall  not  stand,  neither  he  for  him.  This 
is  the  later  Hebrew  form  of  the  clauses  in  Isa.  vii.  7,  xiv.  24,  where 
cip  is  used.  lO?  is  used  in  this  sense  here  and  in  Esther  iii.  4, 
Eccles.  ii.  9.     The  plan  of  Antiochus  will  not  succeed. 

18.  The  historical  facts  behind  this  verse  are  shortly  as 
follows.  In  197  B.C.  Antiochus  made  an  expedition  into  Asia 
Minor.  This  expedition  was  attended  with  great  success  and 
most  of  the  cities  made  their  submission  to  him.  In  the  same  year 
he  made  himself  master  of  the  Thracian  Chersonese,  and  in  192 
effected  a  landing  in  Greece.  But  here  his  successes  came  to  an 
end.  In  191  his  forces  were  routed  by  the  Romans  at  Thermopylae, 
and  in  the  following  year  he  sustained  such  an  overwhelming 
defeat  at  Magnesia  that  he  had  to  submit  to  the  most  humiliating 
conditions  dictated  by  the  conqueror. 

turn  his  face,  i.e.  towards  the  West,  to  the  islands  and 
coastlands  of  the  Mediterranean. 

M  2 


126  DANIEL  11.  19-2T 

many  :  but  a  "^  prince  shall  cause  the  reproach  offered  by 
him  to  cease ;  yea,  moreover,  he  shall  cause  his  reproach 

19  to  turn  upon  him.  Then  he  shall  turn  his  face  toward 
the  fortresses  of  his  own  land  :  but  he  shall  stumble  and 

20  fall,  and  shall  not  be  found.  Then  shall  stand  up  in  his 
^^  place  one  that  shall  cause  an  exactor  to  pass  through  the 
glory  of  the  kingdom  :  but  within  few  days  he  shall  be 

21  c  destroyed,  neither  in  anger,  nor  in  battle.     And  in  his 

*  Or,  captain  **  Or,  office  *^  Heb.  broken. 


a  prince.  Lucius  Cornelius  Scipio,  the  Roman  general  at  the 
battle  of  Magnesia. 

tlie  reproach  offered  by  him,  i.e.  the  defiant  attitude  taken 
by  Antiochus  towards  the  Romans.  Antiochus  offered  hospitality 
to  Hannibal  and  told  the  Romans  that  they  had  no  more  business 
with  his  doings  in  the  East  than  he  had  with  theirs  in  the  West. 

yea,  moreover.  This  rendering  cannot  be  defended.  The  text 
is  corrupt,  and  needs  to  be  emended. 

cause  his  reproach,  &c.,  i.  e.  at  Magnesia. 

19.  In  order  to  raise  the  vast  fine  imposed  on  him  Antiochus 
retired  to  the  fortresses  of  the  East.  After  plundering  the  temple 
of  Bel  in  Elymais  he  and  his  followers  were  set  upon  by  the 
inhabitants  of  the  place  and  slain  187  e.g. 

20.  Seleucus  IV,  Philopaior,  187-175  B.C.  This  king  impressed 
himself  on  the  memories  of  the  Jews  by  his  attempt  to  rob  the 
Temple  through  the  agency  of  Heliodorus.  The  full  account  is 
given  in  2  Mace.  iii.  1-40. 

glory  of  the  kingdom.  Cf.  ver.  16.  Babylon  is  designated 
'the  glory  of  kingdoms '  in  Isa.  xiii.  19. 

shall  be  destroyed.  Seleucus  is  the  first  of  the  three  horns 
mentioned  in  vii.  8  of  our  text.  Appian  speaks  of  his  death  as  due 
to  a  conspiracy  headed  by  Heliodorus. 

21-45.  Antiochus  IV,  Epiphanes,  175-164  B.C.  This  Antiochus 
was  the  son  of  Antiochus  the  Great  and  the  brother  of  the  late 
king.  For  fourteen  years  he  had  been  a  hostage  at  Rome  in 
accordance  with  the  treaty  concluded  by  the  Romans  with  his 
father.  At  the  request  of  Seleucus  IV  the  Romans  released 
Antiochus  and  took  in  his  stead  Demetrius  the  son  of  Seleucus. 
While  Antiochus  was  on  his  waj'  home,  Seleucus  was  murdered 
by  Heliodorus.  By  the  help  of  Eumenes,  king  of  Pergamum,  and 
Attains,  Antiochus  seized  the  throne,  which  legitimately  belonged 
to  his  nephew  Demetrius. 


DANIEL  11.  22,  23  127 

*  place  shall  stand  up  a  contemptible  person,  to  whom 
they  had  not  given  the  honour  of  the  kingdom  :  but 
he  shall  come  in  time  of  security,  and  shall  obtain  the 
kingdom  by  flatteries.  And  with  the  arms  of  a  flood  22 
shall  they  be  swept  away  from  before  him,  and  shall  be 
broken  ;  yea,  also  the  prince  of  ^  the  covenant.  And  after  25 
the  league  made  with  him  he  shall  work  deceitfully :  for 
he  shall  come  up,  and  shall  become  strong,  with  a  small 
*  Or,  office  ''  Or,  his  covenant 


21.  a  contemptible  person.  Cf.  vii.  8  where  he  is  called 
'  the  httlc  horn.'  The  term  here  may  be  applied  to  him  in 
derision  of  the  title  he  assumed,  Epiphanes  (i.  e.  ©cos  fmc{>avr]s) 
*  God  manifest.' 

to  whom  they  had  not  given,  &c.  He  was  not  the  legitimate 
heir.     See  note  above. 

in  time  of  security.     Cf.  24,  viii.  25. 

by  flatteries.  After  his  accession,  as  we  learn  from  a  recently 
discovered   inscription,  Antiochus  made  himself  so  popular  that 
the  people  of  Antioch  recorded  a  vote  of  thanks  to  Eumenes  and 
Attalus  for  their  share  in  procuring  his  accession  to  the  throne. 
22-24.  Events  in  Syria  during  the  years  175-170  B.C. 

22.  with  the  arms  of  a  flood,  &c.  Rather  <  the  arms  of  the 
flood.'  But  as  Bevan  remarks  this  '  would  be  a  singularly  in- 
appropriate designation  for  the  armies  defeated  by  Antiochus.' 
Hence  for  fl^pri  he  reads  f^t^rr,  and  thus  instead  of  *  with  the 
arms  of  a  flood  .  . .  before  him  '  wc  have  '  forces  (i.  e.  of  Heliodorus 
and  other  domestic  enemies  of  Antiochus)  shall  be  utterly  over- 
whelmed before  him.' 

the  prince  of  the  covenant,  i.  e.  the  Jewish  high-priest 
Onias  III,  who  was  removed  from  his  office  by  Antiochus  in 
T75  B.C.  and  was  murdered  at  Antioch  in  171.  See  note  on 
ix,  26. 

23.  Antiochus  outwitted  all  his  friends  and  confederates. 
shall  come  up.     This  is  taken  to  mean  '  shall  rise  to  power,' 

but  there  is  no  parallel  for  such  a  use.  In  fact  the  present  text  is 
unsatisfactory.  The  LXX  presupposes  quite  a  different  text  and 
Theod.  renders  the  next  verb  (ci^r)  by  vntpiaxvcrei  avrovs.  If  the 
latter  is  right  we  should  add  cn^'jr  after  ci'r,  which  word  could  go 
then  excellently  with  both  verbs  ;  '  shall  be  superior  to  and  stronger 
than  they.' 

with  a  small  people.    Apparently  the  partisans  of  Antiochus. 


128  DANIEL  11.  24,  25 

24  people.  In  time  of  security  shall  he  come  even  upon 
the  fattest  places  of  the  province ;  and  he  shall  do  that 
which  his  fathers  have  not  done,  nor  his  fathers'  fathers  ; 
he  shall  scatter  among  them  prey,  and  spoil,  and  sub- 
stance :  yea,  he  shall  devise  his  devices  against  the  strong 

25  holds,  even  for  a  time.     And  he  shall  stir  up  his  power 


24.    In   time   of  security   shall   he    come  even.      The  vav 

translated  *  even  '  here  should,  perhaps,  with  Theod.  be  transposed 
to  the  beginning  of  the  verse:  'and  in  time  of  security  he  shall 
come.' 

come  even  upon  the  fattest  places  of  the  province,  lit. '  of 
a  province.'  What  the  reference  is  is  not  clear.  It  is  generally 
explained  of  Galilee  or  Lower  Egypt,  but,  as  Bevan  objects,  to 
describe  either  'as  "the  fattest  parts  of  a  province"  would  be 
a  strange  figure  of  speech.'  He  proposes,  therefore,  to  render : 
'  assail  the  mightiest  men  of  each)  province.'  Cf.  Isa,  x.  16,  Ps. 
Ixxviii.  31  for  this  use  of  '20^"0.  The  general  sense  agrees  with 
viii.  25  *in  (their)  securit3'  he  shall  destro3'  many'  and  viii.  24 
*he  shall  destroy'  the  mighty  ones.'  By  his  intrigues  Antiochus 
would  remove  his  chief  opponents  in  each  province. 

he  shall  do  that  which  his  fathers  have  not  done . .  .  fathers' 
fathers.  If  these  words  stand  alone  they  may  refer  to  Antiochus' 
attempts  to  Helienize  his  subjects  and  put  down  all  religions  but 
his  own.  But  if  they  refer  to  what  follows  they  may  be  explained 
of  Antiochus'  prodigal  generosity.  Cf.  i  Mace.  iii.  30,  'the  gifts 
which  he  used  to  give  aforetime  with  a  liberal  hand,  and  he 
abounded  above  all  the  kings  which  were  before  him.'  This 
characteristic  is  marked  by  Livy  xli.  20  'regius  erat  animus  in 
urbium  donis  et  deorum  cultu.'  Then  follows  a  list  of  his  acts  of 
munificence. 

among'  them,  i.e.  his  adherents.  For  this  vague  use  of  the 
plural  compare  ver.  7. 

prey,  and  spoil,  and  substance.  Cf.  i  Mace.  i.  19  '  he  took 
the  spoils  of  Egj'pt.' 

devise  his  devices  agfainst  the  strong*  holds,  i.  e.  of  Egypt, 
such  as  Pelusium  — '  the  Gate  of  Egypt,'  Livj'  xlv.  1 1.  Cf.  i  Mace, 
i.  19,  *  got  possession  of  his  strong  cities  in  the  land  of  Egypt.' 
But  Antiochus'  projects  were  not  limited  to  the  conquest  of  indi- 
vidual cities.     He  wished  to  be  king  of  Egypt  (i  Mace.  i.  16). 

for  a  time.     Cf.  verses  27,  35. 
25-28.      170  B.C.     Antiochus'  first  Egyption  campaign  in  which 
he    defeated    Ptolemy  Philomctor  near   Mount  Casius,  captured 


DANIEL  11.  26  129 

and  his  courage  against  the  king  of  the  south  with  a  great 
army  ;  and  the  king  of  the  south  shall  war  in  battle  with 
an  exceeding  great  and  mighty  army  :  but  he  shall  not 
stand,  for  they  shall  devise  devices  against  him.  Yea,  26 
they  that  eat  of  his  ^  meat  shall  ^  destroy  him,  and  his 
army  shall  overflow  :  and  many  shall  fall  down  slain. 
*  Or,  dainties  ^  Heb.  break, 

Pelusium,  the  key  of  Egypt,  and  with  Ptolemy  in  his  suite 
proceeded  to  Memphis.  Pretending  to  act  in  the  interests  of  the 
latter,  Antiochus  made  himself  master  of  Egypt.  In  the  meantime 
the  Alexandrians  had  made  Ptolemy's  brother  king  under  the  title 
Ptolemy  Physcon.  Antiochus  next  besieged  Alexandria,  but  after 
many  ineffectual  efforts  to  capture  it  withdrew  to  Syria  on  the 
approach  of  three  Roman  envoys  who  had  been  appointed  by 
the  Senate  to  put  an  end  to  the  war.  On  his  return  Antiochus 
plundered  the  Temple  in  Jerusalem  :  i  Mace.  i.  20-34,  a  Mace. 
V.  11-21. 

We  have  thus  adopted  the  view  of  Wellhausen  {Israel,  und 
Jiid.  Gesch}^  1897.  P«  246  «.)  who  maintains  that  Antiochus  made 
only  two  Egyptian  campaigns,  the  third,  that  of  xi.  40,  41,  being 
an  unfulfilled  prophecy.  So  also  Mahaffy  {Empire  of  the  Ptolemies, 
p.  494  sq.  who  contends  that  what  are  commonly  regarded  as 
two  distinct  campaigns  of  170  and  169  b.  c.  are  in  reality  two 
stages  in  one  and  the  same  campaign.  Driver  favours  this  view 
but  points  out  that  since  the  persecuting  edict  belongs  to  the 
year  168  b.c,  Antiochus'  attacl^  on  Jerusalem  must  have  taken 
place  in  170  b.  c.  owing  to  i  Mace.  i.  20,  29,  54. 

25.  king-  of  the  south,  i.  e.  Ptolemy  VI,  Philometor. 

with  a  great  army.      On  Antiochus'  army  cf.  i  Mace.  i.  17. 

he  shall  not  stand,  for  they  shall  devise,  &c.  Ptolemy 
Philometor  could  not  maintain  the  contest  owing  to  the  treachery 
of  his  followers.  Antiochus  defeated  him  near  Pelusium  and  got 
possession  of  the  border  fortress  of  Pelusium  by  dishonourable 
means  (Polyb.  xxviii.  7,  16). 

26.  they  that  eat,  <5:c.  Possibly  Eulaeus  and  Lenaeus  whose 
ill-omened  advice  Jed  to  Ptolemy's  attempt  to  reconquer  Syria. 
Ptolemy  fell  under  their  influence  after  the  death  of  his  mother 
Cleopatra  in  174  b.c. 

shall  overflow.  For  n^ir*  we  should  (cf.  ver.  22  read 
F)t2^  _  <  shall  be  swept  away,'  i.  e.  Ptolemy's  army.  The  text 
would  have  to  refer  to  that  of  Antiochus. 

many  shall  fall  down  slain.     Cf.  i  Mace.  i.   18,  'and  man}' 


130  DANIEL   11.  27-30 

27  And  as  for  both  these  kings,  their  hearts  shall  be  to 
do  mischief,  and  they  shall  speak  lies  at  one  table  :  but  it 
shall  not  prosper ;  for  yet  the  end  sliall  be  at  the  time 

28  appointed.  Then  shall  he  return  into  his  land  with  great 
substance ;  and  his  heart  shall  he  against  the  holy  cove- 
nant ;  and  he  shall  do  his  pleasure^  and  return  to  his  own 

29  land.  At  the  time  ap[)ointed  he  shall  return,  and  come 
into  the  south;  but  it  shall  not  be  in  the  latter  time  as  it 

30  was  in  the  former.    For  ships  of  Kittim  shall  come  against 

fell  down  wounded  to  death,'  which  words  are  used  of  the  hanie 
events. 

27.  their  hearts  shall  be  to  do  mischief,  and  they  shall 
speak  lies  at  oae  table.  When  Antiochus  conquered  Ptolemy 
Philometor  the  Alexandrians  raised  his  brother,  under  the  title 
Plolemy  Physcon,  to  the  throne.  Antiochus  thereupon  took 
Philometor  under  his  protection,  Antiochus  on  the  one  side  pro- 
fessing that  he  did  so  solely  in  the  interest  of  Philometor,  and 
Philometor,  on  the  other  hand,  professing  that  he  believed  in  his 
uncle's  disinterestedness. 

it  shall  not  prosper,  i.  e.  the  subjugation  of  Egypt,  which 
shall  not  take  place  until  *  the  time  appointed.'  See  ver.  43. 
But  *  the  end  '  in  the  text  may  refer  not  to  this  matter  but  to 
Antiochus'  death. 

28.  Antiochus'  attack  on  Jerusalem  at  the  close  of  his  first 
Egyptian  campaign. 

with  great  substance,  i.e.  'the  spoils  of  Egypt '  (i  Mace, 
i.  19). 

the  holy  covenant,  i.  e.  the  Jewish  religion  ;  cf.  ix.  27, 
note. 

29-39.  Antiochus^  second  Egyptian  Campaign  168  b.  c.  and  his 
persecution  of  the  Jews.  This  campaign  was  directed  against  the 
two  brothers— Ptolemy  Philometor  and  Ptolemy  Physcon — who 
were  now  reconciled. 

29.  At  the  time  appointed,  i.e.  in  the  counsels  of  God.  Cf. 
ver.  27. 

it  shall  not  be  in  the  latter  time,  &c.  That  is,  this  campaign 
shall  have  a  very  different  issue  from  the  former.  On  the  Hebrew 
idiom  cf.  Josh.  xiv.  11,  i  Sam.  xxx.  24. 

30.  ships  of  Kittim.  Cf.  Num.  xxiv.  24.  Originally  the 
word  Kittim  denoted  a  town  in  C^-jirus,  then  generally  the  inhabi- 
tants of  Cyprus  (Gen.  x.  4,  Isa.  xxiii.  i,  12).  Later  it  was  used 
of  the  isles  and  coasts  of  the  Mediterranean.     Thus  in  the  Rook  of 


DANIEL  11.  31  131 

him  ;  therefore  he  shall  be  grieved,  and  shall  return,  and 
have  indignation  against  the  holy  covenant,  and  shall  do 
his  pleasure  :  he  shall  even  return,  and  have  regard  unto 
them  that  forsake  the  holy  covenant.  And  arms  shall 
stand  on  his  part,  and  they  shall  profane  the  sanctuary, 
even  the  fortress,  and  shall  take  away  the  continual  burnt 
offer'uv^^   and  they   shall   set    up  the   abomination   that 


Jubilees  and  in  i  Mace,  it  means  the  Macedonians,  while  in  our 
text  it  clearly  designates  the  Romans,  The  allusion  here  is  to 
C.  Popiiius  Laenas  and  his  fellow  envoys,  who  summarily  required 
Antiochus  to  leave  Egypt. 

therefore  he  shall  be  grieved.  Better  '  and  he  shall  be 
cowed  ' — cf.  Ps.  cix.  r6,  Ezek.  xiii.  2a,  or  perhaps  with  Belirmann 
'  and  they  shall  threaten  him '  (lit.  '  he  shall  be  threatened ' ;.  This 
latter  sense  is  found  in  Syriac,  and  the  LXX  and  Vulg.  support 
this  rendering. 

he  shall  even  return.  Translate  'and  he  shall  return,'  i.  e. 
to  Antioch. 

regard  imto  them  that  forsake  the  holy  covenant.  On 
his  return  to  Antioch,  Antiochus  kept  up  communication  with  the 
apostate  Jews.  These,  under  the  leadership  of  Jason,  the  renegade 
high-priest,  strove  to  hellenize  the  nation.  See  i  Mace.  i.  11- 15, 
2  Mace.  iv.  7-17,  Assumption  of  Moses  viii.  r-5. 

31.  arms  shall  stand  on  his  part.  Rather  'armies — i.e. 
troops,  cf,  15,  22 — (sent)  from  him  shall  stand  up.'  On  the  forces 
brought  by  the  chief  collector  of  Antiochus  named,  according  to 
2  Mace.  v.  24,  Apollonius,  see  i  Mace.  i.  29, 

they  shall  profane  the  sanctuary,  even  the  fortress. 
The  Temple  at  this  period  had  fortifications— hence  called  the 
stronghold — as  we  may  infer  from  their  being  afterwards  rebuilt, 
according  to  i  Mace.  iv.  60,  vi,  7. 

shall  take  away  the  contintial  burnt  offering.  A  similar 
statement  is  found  in  viii.  11. 

they  shall  set  up  the  abomination  that  maketh  desolate, 
i.  e,  the  heathen  aUar  that  was  built  on  the  altar  of  burnt  offering. 
This  was  done  according  to  i  Mace,  i.  54,  on  the  15th  day  of 
Chisleu  (December),  and  on  the  25th  day  of  the  same  month 
according  to  i.  59,  they  offered  heathen  sacrifices  on  this  altar 
which  had  been  built  on  the  altar  of  God,  With  regard  to  the 
peculiar  expression  'abomination  that  maketh  desolate '  (cp.:rp  yjr^p 
ix.  37,  xi.  3T,  co-r  y^pc  viii.  13,  xii.  11  (vrc)).  Nestle,  ZATW.. 
1884,  P«  248?  suggests  that  this  Hebrewphrase  was  a  Jewish  carica- 


132  DANIEL  11.  32,  33 

32  maketh  desolate.  And  such  as  do  wickedly  against 
the  covenant  shall  he  *  pervert  by  flatteries  :  but  the 
people  that  know  their  God   shall   be   strong,  and   do 

33  exploits.  And  ^  they  that  be  wise  among  the  people 
shall  instruct  many  :  yet  they  shall  fall  by  the  sword  and 

*  Heb.  make  profane.  ^  Or,  the  teachers  of  the  people 

ture  of  D'QiC  ^1  *  Lord  of  heaven ',  a  title  occurring  in  Phoenician 
and  with  the  necessary  change  of  the  final  consonant,  in  Aramaic 
inscriptions.  This  phrase,  which  appears  in  i  Mace.  i.  54  as 
^ZiXvy^a  ipTjtiwafojs,  was  first  applied  to  the  heathen  altar  and  then 
probably  to  the  image  of  Olympian  Zeus  beside  it.  For  according 
to  Taanith  iv.  6  ("iyrry  c'^i*  Torn)  a  statue  of  Zeus  was  set  up. 
For  Douro  we  should  read  Dt2u.''rT. 

32.  such  as  do  wickedly  a^fainst  the  covenant*  For  this 
use  of  the  verb  cf.  ix.  5,  xii.  10.  These  are  in  this  view  the 
apostates  mentioned  in  ver.  30.  But  there  is  much  to  be  said  for 
Bevan's  view  that  the  words  should  be  translated  *  those  who 
bring  guilt  upon  the  covenanted  people,'  as  opposed  to  the  phrase 
in  xii.  3  •  they  that  turn  many  to  righteousness.'  This  translation 
is  supported  by  the  rendering  adopted  in  R.V.  of  the  verb  in  this 
sentence.     See  next  note. 

shall  he  pervert.  The  Revisers  here  follow  practically  the 
sense  that  this  Semitic  root  has  in  Syriac,  i.e.  Gentile,  Pagan, 
Apostate.  If  this  is  right,  it  substantiates  the  meaning  given  to 
the  preceding  clause  by  Bevan.  For  the  writer  would  not  speak 
of  apostatizing  the  apostates. 

hy  flatteries.    Cf.  i  Mace.  ii.  18. 

the  people  that  know  their  Ood  shall  be  strong,  i.  e.  stead- 
fast. Cf.  I  Mace.  i.  62.  *■  Many  in  Israel  were  fully  resolved  and 
confirmed  in  themselves  .  .  .  that  they  might  not  profane  the  holy 
covenant:  and  they  died.' 

and  do  exploits,  better  render  simply  '  do,'  in  the  sense  of 
acting  with  effect.  This  absolute  use  of  the  Hebrew  verb  has 
occurred  already  viii.  12,  24,  ix.  19,  xi.  28,  30.  This  meaning  is 
found  occasionally  in  the  O.T.,  a  Chron.  xxxi.  21,  Jer.  xiv.  7, 
Ezck.  XX.  9. 

33.  they  that  be  wise.  These  are  not  the  teachers,  but  the 
pious.  They  are  strongly  opposed  to  the  Hcllenizing  party,  and 
themselves  constitute  the  Hasidacans  referred  to  in  r  Mace.  ii.  42, 
vii.  13,  2  Mace.  xiv.  6.  Around  them  gathered  the  entire  religious 
force  of  the  nation.     On  this  party  see  i  Enoch  xc.  6-9. 

shall  instruct  many,  i.e.  by  their  example  and  loj^alty. 
yet  they  shall  fall  by  the  sword,  &c.     These  persecutions 


DANIEL  11.  34,  ?.5  133 

by  flame,  by  captivity  and  by  spoil,   many  days.    Now  34 
when  they  shall  fall,  they  shall  be  holpen  with  a  little 
help :  but  many  shall  join  themselves  unto  them  with 
flatteries.     And  some  of  ^  them  that  be  wise  shall  fall,  to  35 
refine  them,  and  to  purify,  and  to  make  them  white,  even 

•^  Or,  ihe  teachers 


referred  to  later  in  Heb.  xi.  36-38  are  describee'  more  fully  in 
I  Mace.  i.  57,  60,  61,  63,  ii.  31-38,  iii.  41,  v.  13,  2  Mace.  vi.  10,  11, 
18-31,  vii. 

34.  a  little  help.  The  help  here  referred  to  is  that  of  the 
Maccabees.  The  rising  of  Mattathias  and  his  sons  assisted  by  the 
faithful  in  ever  growing  numbers,  and  their  early  victories,  are 
described  in  i  Mace.  ii.  42  48,  iii.  11,  12,  23-26,  iv.  12-15,  t>"t 
to  our  author  the  greatest  victories  won  by  the  arm  of  man  are 
only  *  a  little  help.'  He  looks  for  deliverance  not  from  this  source, 
but  from  the  Lord. 

many  shall  join  themselves  unto  them  with  flatteries. 
These  words  are  taken  to  indicate  that  many  joined  the  national 
cause  from  sheer  terror,  because  of  the  ruthless  severities  practised 
by  Judas  and  his  party.  .See  i  Mace.  ii.  44.  iii.  5,  8,  vi.  19,  21,  24, 
vii.  6,  7,  24-32.  But  the  context,  as  the  following  verses  show, 
is  against  the  idea,  that  the  Maccabees  have  as  yet  attained  much 
pKJwer.  In  ver.  35  it  speaks  only  of  martyrdoms  on  the  part  of 
the  faithful,  and  in  ver.  36  only  of  Antiochus'  success  during  the 
time  allotted  to  him.  It  would  not,  therefore,  be  natural  to  paj' 
court  to  a  cause  still  struggling  for  a  very  doubtful  victorj'. 
Accordingly  I  offer  the  following  suggestion,  based  on  the  corrupt 
but  illuminating  text  of  the  LXX.  The  details  cannot  be  given 
here,  but  the  restored  text  would  run  'and  there  shall  join  them 
many  in  the  city  and  many  in  their  several  homesteads,  i.e.  the 
country.' 

35.  some  of  them  that  be  wise  shall  fall,  i.  e.  some  of  the 
leaders  of  the  faithful  shall  suffer  martyrdom  or  fall  in  the  struggle. 
This  phrase  rendered  '  the  wise '  (cf.  xi.  33,  xii.  3,  10'  could  just  as 
well  be  rendered  '  the  teachers,'  i.e.  those  that  maUe  wise.as  in  ix. 
22,  and  possibly  in  xii.  3.  Where  the  text  reads  'shall  fall'  the 
LXX  reads  'shall  be  wise' — a  reading  which  presupposes ^asMw 
(i'tdc')  instead  o( yikkasWIu  (V'x'D')' 

to  refine  them,  rather,  it  is  to  be  rendered  *  to  refine  amongst 
them,'  i.e.  amongst  the  people  at  large,  so  Bevan  and  Driver. 
But  turning  aside  from  the  text  %ve  observe  that  the  Versions 
presuppose  not  active  but  middle  or  passive  verbs,  and  in  support 


134  DANIEL  11.  36,  ?,? 

to  the  time  of  tlic  end  :  because  it  is  yet  for  the  time 
:,G  appointed.  And  the  king  sliall  do  according  to  his  will ; 
and  he  «hall  exalt  himself,  and  magnify  himself  above 
every  god,  and  shall  speak  marvellous  things  against  the 
God  of  gods  :  and  he  shall  prosper  till  the  indignation  be 
accomplished;  for  that  which  is  determined  shall  be  done. 
37  Neither  shall  he  regard  the  gods  of  his  fathers,  nor  the 

of  the  text  presupposed  by  them,  it  is  noteworthy  that  the  same 
three  verbs  recur  in  xii.  10  in  the  passive.  Into  the  details  of  this 
critical  question  I  cannot  enter  here,  but  it  is  possible  that  the 
LXX  is  right,  'Some  of  the  wise  shall  be  wise  with  a  view  to 
their  being  refined  and  purified  and  made  white.'  Cf.  xii.  10. 
for  the  time  appointed.  Cf.  ver.  27. 
36-39.  These  verses  furnish  a  characterization  of  Antiochus, 
his  presumptuousness  and  impiety,  and  show  how  he  set  at 
naught  the  various  national  religions,  in  order  to  establish  the 
cult  of  his  own  god. 

36.  accordingf  to  his  will.  This  phrase  has  been  used  in 
viii.  4  of  the  Persian  Empire,  in  xi.  3  of  Alexander,  and  in  xi.  16 
again  of  Antiochus. 

magnify  liimself.    On  this  phrase  cf.  ver.  37  and  Isa.  x.  15. 

above  every  g"od.  On  the  later  coins  of  Antioch  there  was 
the  inscription  BASIAEHS  ANTIOXOT  ©EOT  Eni*AN0Y2  ^-  '  of 
King  Antiochus,  God  manifest,'  and  still  later  to  the  above 
he  added  NIKH*OPOY  =  *  bearer  of  victory,'  a  distinctive  epithet 
of  the  Olympian  Zeus.  See  Driver  ui  loc.  Such  an  assumption 
of  the  divine  names  and  dignity  naturally  caused  him  to  be 
regarded  by  the  Jews  as  a  monster  of  impiety. 

speak  marvellons  thing's  against  the  God  of  gods,'  i.  c. 
unspeakable  impieties  (cf.  vii.  8,  25)  against  the  God  of  Israel, 
cf.  ii.  47. 

till  the  indignation  be  accomplished.  Cf.  viii.  19  ;  and 
Isa.  X.  25  from  which  latter  passage  the  words  are  borrowed. 

that  which  is  determined  shall  be  done,  i.  c.  the  divine 
will  must  be  carried  out.  The  phrase  as  in  ix.  27  is  drawn  from 
Isa.  X.  23. 

37.  Neither  shall  he  regard  the  gods  of  his  fathers.  The 
efforts  of  Antiochus  to  bring  about  uniformity  in  religion  and 
custom  throusrhout  his  empire  (cf.  i  Mace.  i.  4i\  and  his  supreme 
devotion  to  the  Olympian  Zeus  led  Iiim  to  discredit  the  local 
deities,  even  those  whom  his  fathers  had  worshipped.  Amongst 
these  was  the  Greek  Apollo,  whose  form,  represented  on  the 
coins  of  his  fathers,  and  on  his  own  coins  at  the  beginning  of  his 


DANIEL  11.  3?,  .^9  ^35 

desire  of  women,  nor  regard  any  god  :  for  he  shall  magnify 
himself  above  all.    But  in  his  "  place  shall  he  honour  the  38 
god  of  fortresses  :  and  a  god  whom  his  fathers  knew  not 
shall  he  honour  with  gold,  and  silver,  and  with  precious 
stones,  and  pleasant  things.     And  he  shall  deal  with  the  39 
strongest  fortresses  by  the  help  of  a  strange  god  ;  ^  whoso- 

*  Or,  q^^cc  ^'  Or,  whom  lie  shall  acknowledge  and  increase 

ivith  glory     or,  shall  increase  glory 


reign  was  subsequently  wholly  displaced  by  that  of  the  Olympian 
Zeus. 

nor  the  desire  of  women.  Probably  the  Phoenician  deity 
Tammuz,  the  equivalent  of  the  Greek  Adonis  whose  cult  had 
been  popular  in  Sj'ria  for  centuries,  especially  among  women 
(Ezek,  viii.  14).     Cf.  Milton,  Paradise  Lost,  i.  446  ff. 

Thammuz  came  next  behind 
Whose  annual  wound  in  Lebanon  allured 
The  Syrian  damsels  to  lament  his  fate 
In  amorous  ditties  all  a  summer's  day ; 
"While  smooth  Adonis  from  his  native  rock 
Ran  purple  to  the  sea — supposed  with  blood 
Of  Thammuz,  yearlj'  wounded  :  the  love  tale 
Infected  Sion's  daughters  with  like  heat. 

nor  regurd  any  god.  According  to  Polj'bius  Antiochus  had 
plundered  most  temples  within  his  reach,  xxxi.  4,  and  his  death 
was  due,  as  we  know,  to  an  unsuccessful  attempt  to  rifle  a  temple 
in  Persia,     See  i  Mace.  vi.  i,  4. 

38.  the  god  of  fortresses.  This  is  apparently  Jupiter 
Capitolinus,  to  whom  Antiochus  had  erected  a  magnificent  temple 
in  Antioch,  and  to  whose  temple  he  had  sent  golden  sacred 
vessels  of  great  worth.  Livy,  Book  xli.  20  ;  also  xlii.  6.  His 
fathers  had  recognized  Zeus  Olympius,  it  is  true. 

39.  he  shall  deal  with  the  strongest  fortresses  by  the  help 
of  a  strange  god.  This  apparently  means  that  he  will  conquer 
them  by  his  help,  but  this  sense  is  unsatisfactory,  and  the 
Hebrew  questionable.  Hence  Hitzig,  Bevan  and  others  change  D? 
into  US  and  render  'he  shall  procure  for  the  strong  fortress  the 
people  of  a  strange  god.'  The  reference  would  here  be  to  the 
heathen  colonists  and  soldiers  settled  by  Antiochus  in  the  fortified 
cities  of  Judea  and  in  Jerusalem,  i  Mace.  i.  33,  iii.  36.  45.  With 
the  phrase  'people  of  a  strange  god'  cf.  Num.  xxi,  29.  and  for  this 


136  DANIEL  11.  40 

ever  acknowledgeth  hhn  he  will  increase  with  glory  :  and 

he  shall  cause  them  to  rule  over  many,  and  shall  divide 

40  the  land  for  a  price.    And  at  the  time  of  the  end  shall  the 

use  of  the  Hebrew  verb  and  preposition  cf.  2  Sam.  xv.  i,  1  Kings 

i-  5. 

whosoever  acknowledg'eth  him  he  will  increase  with 
gflory,  i.  e.  whosoever  approveth  of  Antiochus'  policy.  The  text 
might  also  be  rendered  as  in  the  margin,  or  again  as  follows  '■  he 
whom  he  recognizes  he  shall  increase  with  glory.' 

cause  thenx  to  rule  over  many,  &c.  Rather  '  the  many.' 
The  appointment  of  apostates  to  supreme  offices  was  one  of 
Antiochus'  methods  of  government,  cf.  i  Mace.  ix.  25.  *  And 
Bacchides  chose  out  the  ungodly  men  and  made  them  lords  of  the 
country.'  The  chief  offices  were  sold  for  a  price,  cf.  2  Mace.  iv. 
8-10,  24. 

40-45.  Transition  frotn  history  to  prophecy.  Three  different 
interpretations  have  been  given  to  these  verses.  1°.  They  have 
been  regarded  as  a  recapitulation,  and  as  giving  a  brief  sketch 
of  the  course  of  events,  from  about  171  B.C.  to  the  death  of 
Antiochus.  But  the  introductory  words,  *  At  the  time  of  the  end,' 
excludes  the  assumption  that  we  have  here  a  recapitulation.  The 
present  belongs  to  the  time  of  the  writer.  The  persecutions 
described  in  ver.  35  are  to  last  •  to  the  time  of  the  end.*  That 
time  has  now  come.  2°.  They  have  been  taken  as  relating  to 
historical  events,  after  those  already  mentioned,  i.  e.  after  the  year 
168  B.  c.  But  our  historical  authorities  know  nothing  of  an 
expedition  against  Egypt  after  this  date.  The  chief  events  of  his 
reign  in  167  u.c.  are  his  institution  at  Daphne  of  the  great  series 
of  games,  and  his  reception  of  the  envoy  of  the  Roman  Senate, 
whose  suspicions  he  succeeded  in  placating.  In  the  following 
year,  166  b.  c,  he  started  on  an  expedition  in  the  course  of  which 
he  perished.  It  is  true  that  Porphyry,  according  to  Jerome,  does 
speak  of  another  expedition  to  Egypt,  but  the  incidents  recorded 
by  Porphyry,  apart  from  one  or  two  details,  could  all  have  been 
drawn  from  the  text  of  Daniel,  and  the  mention  of  Antiochus 
pitching  his  tent  at  Apedno,  is  due  evidently  to  a  misunder- 
standing of  a  Hebrew  word  in  Daniel  xi.  45.  3°.  Hence  the  third 
hypothesis  alone  is  tenable  that  this  passage  is  not  a  description 
of  the  past,  but  a  forecast  of  the  future.  As  Driver  writes,  '  the 
author  draws  here  an  imaginative  picture  of  the  end  of  the  tyrant 
king,  similar  to  the  ideal  one  of  the  ruin  of  Sennacherib  in 
Isa.  x.  28-32 :  he  depicts  him  as  successful  where  he  had 
previously  failed,  viz.  in  Egypt ;  while  reaping  the  spoils  of  his 
victories,  he  is  called  away  by  rumours  from  a  distance ;  and 
then,  just  after  he  has  set  out  on  a  further  career  of  conquest  and 


DANIEL  11.  41-43  137 

king  of  the  south  '^  contend  with  him  :  and  the  king  of  the 
north  shall  come  against  him  Hkea  whirlwind,  with  chariots, 
and  with  horsemen,  and  with  many  ships  ;  and  he  shall 
enter  into  the  countries,  and  shall   overflow  and  pass 
through.     He  shall  enter  also  into  the  glorious  land,  and  4^ 
many  countries  shall  be  overthrown :  but  these  shall  be 
delivered  out  of  his  hand,  Edom,  and  Moab,  and  the 
chief  of  the  children  of  Ammon.     He  shall  stretch  forth  42 
his  hand  also  upon  the  countries  :  and  the  land  of  Egyj)t 
shall  not  escape.     But  he  shall  have  power  over  the  43 
treasures  of  gold  and  of  silver,  and  over  all  the  precious 

*  Heb.  push  a/, 

plunder,  as  he  is  approaching  with  sinister  purpose  the  Holy  City, 
he  meets  his  doom.' 

40.  at  the  time  of  the  end.  The  period  spoken  of  in  ver.  35 
has  now  come  to  a  close. 

the  kinsTof  the  south,  i.e.  Ptolemy  Philometor. 

contend  with.  Literally  '  butt  at.'  The  same  verb  as  in 
viii.  4. 

come  . .  ,  like  a  whirlwind,  i.  e.  Antiochus  will  come  against 
Ptolemy  like  a  whirlwind.  For  this  use  of  the  verb  cf.  Hab. 
iii.  14. 

overflow  and  pass  through.  This  phrase  has  alread}'  occurred 
in  ver.  10. 

41.  the  g'lorious  land.     See  ver.  16. 

many  countries  shall  be  overthrown.  Rnbboih,  i.e.  many 
(fern.),  we  should  clearly  read  tibboth  —  myriads,  cf.  xi.  12,  with 
de  Wette,  Bevan,  Behrmann,  and  others.  Hence  we  render 
*  myriads  shall  be  overthrown.' 

but  these  shall  be  delivered — Edom,  Moab,  Ammon,  the 
nations  hostile  to  the  Jews  even  at  this  period.  Cf,  i  Mace.  iv. 
6r,  V.  3-8. 

the  chief  of  the  children.  Instead  of  nnr-Ni  we  should  with 
the  Pesh.  and  Gesenius-Biihl  read  nntMD  =  the  remnant.  Thus 
we  should  have  'the  remnant  of  the  children  of  Ammon.' 

42.  43.  Conquest  0/ Egypt. 

42.  stretch  forth  his  hand,  i.  e.  seize.     Cf.  Esther  viii.  7. 
shall  not  escape.     For  this  phrase  cf.  Gen.  xxxii.  8. 

43.  This  verse  is  at  variance  with  what  we  know  independently, 
regarding  Antiochus'  financial  position  at  this  time.  He  was  in 
the  greatest  pecuniary  straits. 


138  DANIEL  11.  41,  45—12.  T 

things  of  Egypt  :  and  the  Libyans  and  the  Ethiopians 

44  shall  be  at  his  steps.  But  tidings  out  of  the  east  and  out 
of  the  north  shall  trouble  him  :  and  he  shall  go  forth  with 
great  fury  to  destroy  and  ^  utterly  to  make  away  many. 

45  And  he  shall  plant  the  tents  of  his  palace  ^^  between  the 
sea  and  the  glorious  holy  mountain ;  yet  he  shall  come  to 

12  his  end,  and  none  shall  help  him.    And  at  that  time  shall 
*  Heb.  fo  devote  many.  ^  Or,  between  the  seas  at 


the  Libyans  and  the  Ethiopians  shall  be  at  his  steps,  i.  e. 
follow  him.  These  nations  lived  to  the  west  and  south  of  Egypt 
respectively.     Hence  Egypt  is  represented  as  beset  on  all  sides. 

44.  tidinffs  out  of  the  east.  The  same  Hebrew  word  is  used 
for  tidings  which  made  Sennacherib  retire  (Isa.  xxxvii.  7). 

he  shall  go  forth,  i.  e.  from  Egypt. 

to  destroy  and  utterly  to  make  away.  Literally  'to  destroy 
and  to  ban.'  The  LXX  here  is  corrupt.  But  the  corruption 
points  to  the  original  order  as  being  '  to  ban  and  to  destroy,'  and 
in  this  order  these  two  verbs  are  found  in  a  Chron.  xx.  23. 

45.  shall  plant.  The  verb  y^:  is  used  here  only  in  the  O.T.  in 
this  sense  instead  of  rrc:.     It  is  very  Ir*-^  Hebrew. 

the  tents  of  his  palace.  The  word  for  palace  {appedeii) 
which  is  found  here  only  in  the  O.T.  but  occurs  frequently  in 
Syriac,  is  derived  from  the  Persian  apadana.  This  word  was 
misunderstood  by  Porphyry  as  being  the  name  of  a  place. 

between  the  sea  and  the  holy  motintain.  Our  text  implies 
that  Antiochus  died  in  Palestine  between  the  Mediterranean  and 
Mount  Zion,  whereas  he  actually  died  at  Tabae  in  Persia,  164  b.c. 
It  was  a  reasonable  expectation  on  the  part  of  the  Jews,  that  their 
greatest  persecutor  should  fall  amid  the  scenes  of  his  greatest 
crimes.  According  to  viii.  25  he  was  to  perish  '  broken  without 
hand.'  Moreover,  the  old  eschatological  expectations  of  the 
prophets  fixed  on  the  neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem  (Ezek. 
xxxviii-xxxix,  Joel  iii.  2,Zech.  xiv.  2  sqq,,  i  Enoch  xc.  13-19)  as 
the  scene  of  the  conflict  between  the  saints  and  the  hostile 
heathen  powers  or  of  the  judgement  of  the  latter  by  God. 

xii.  1-3.  These  three  verses  form  the  close  of  the  revelation  of 
the  angel,  and  belong  to  what  precedes.  In  fact  xi.  40-45  and  xii. 
1-3  form  a  unity,  being  a  description  of  the  last  times  of  all,  i.e. 
the  destruction  of  the  great  heathen  power,  xi.  40-45,  followed  by 
tumults  and  trouble  throughout  the  world,  out  of  which,  however, 
the  faithful  shall  be  saved.     Then  follows  the  resurrection  of  the 


DANTEL  12.  2  139 

Michael  stand  up,  the  great  prince  which  standeth  for  the 
children  of  thy  people  :  and  there  shall  be  a  time  of  trouble, 
such  as  never  was  since  there  was  a  nation  even  to  that 
same  time  :  and  at  that  time  thy  people  shall  be  delivered, 
every  one  that  shall  be  found  written  in  the  book.     And 


pre-eminently  righteous,  and  of  the  apostates  in  Israel,  and  the  age 
of  everlasting  blessedness. 

1.  At  that  time,  i.e.  the  period  of  the  overthrow  ofAntiochus. 
Michael.  .  .  the  gfreat  prince.     See  x.  13,  21. 

which  standeth  for  the  children  of  thy  people,  i.e.  *  pro- 
tects.'    Cf.Estherviii.il. 

a  time  of  trouble,  such  as  never  was,  &c.  This  phrase  is 
the  standard  description  of  the  last  times.  Cf.  i  Mace.  ix.  27, 
Ass.  Moses  viii.  i,  Mark  xiii.  19,  Matt.  xxiv.  21,  Rev.  xvi.  18. 
So  far  as  the  phrase  itself  goes,  it  occurs  in  a  non-technical  sense 
in  Exod.  ix.  18,24.  The  phrase  'time  of  trouble '  has  already 
occurred  in  Jer.  xxx.  7.  It  refers  here,  of  course,  to  the  gathering 
of  all  the  Gentile  powers  against  Jerusalem.  Amongst  these  were 
probably  the  Libyans  and  Ethiopians,  mentioned  in  xi.  43. 

thy  people,  i.e.  the  true  Israel. 

written  in  the  hook,  i.e.  of  life.  The  book  of  life  as  a 
register  of  the  actual  citizens  of  the  theocratic  community  on 
earth.  This  expression  was  originally  confined  to  temporal  bless- 
ings and  to  the  living  only  in  connexion  with  these.  But  in  the 
present  passage  the  idea  has  been  transformed  through  the  in- 
fluence of  the  new  conception  of  the  kingdom  and  distinctly  refers 
to  an  immortality  of  blessedness.  This  book  has  thus  become 
a  register  of  the  citizens  of  the  coming  kingdom  of  God  whether 
living  or  departed.  For  a  full  account  of  this  and  parallel  phrases 
see  my  edition  of  i  Enoch  xlvii.  3. 

2.  In  Ps.  xlix  and  Ixxiii  there  are  probably  the  first  intimations 
of  the  individual  immortality  of  righteous  souls.  In  the  very  late 
section,  Isa.  xxvi.  1-19,  there  is  probably  the  first  account  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  righteous.  The  righteous, of  courseware  Israelites 
and  they  are  raised  to  share  in  the  blessedness  of  the  Messianic 
kingdom. 

In  Judaism  the  resurrection  in  its  original  form  was  the 
prerogative  of  the  righteous,  but  in  our  text  this  characteristic 
has  been  abandoned,  and  both  the  preeminently  righteous  and  the 
pre-eminently  wicked  have  part  in  the  resurrection.  The  con- 
ception of  the  resurrection  has  thus  declined  in  our  text  into  a  mere 
veliicle  for  bringing  certain  classes  of  the  righteous  and  the  wicked 
to  their  deserts, 


I40  DANIEL  12.  3 

many  of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth  shall 

awake,  some  to  everlasting  life,  and  some  to  shame  and 

3  everlasting  ^  contempt.     And  i>  they  that  be  wise  shall 

*  Or,  abhorrence  ''Or,  the  teachers 

many.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  it  is  not  said  that  all  Israel, 
but  many  in  Israel  shall  be  raised  from  the  dead.  These  •  many  ' 
fall  into  two  classes,  the  pre-eminently  righteous,  amongst  whom 
are  undoubtedly  included  the  martyrs  and  confessors,  and  the  pre- 
eminently wicked  or  the  apostates.  This  is  almost  exactly  what 
we  find  in  i  Enoch  xxii,  where,  however,  the  idea  of  Sheol  is 
in  a  higher  state  of  development  than  that  in  our  text. 

sleep.  Used  of  death  as  in  Jer.  li.  39,  57.  It  was  one  of  the 
commonest  synonyms  for  death. 

sleep  in  the  dust.  This  expression  as  well  as  the  following 
word  awake  is  found  in  the  great  resurrection  passage  in  Isa. 
xxvi.  19. 

in  the  dust  of  the  earth.  This  rendering,  though  it  has  the 
support  of  some  of  the  Versions,  is  not  a  translation  of  the  text, 
which  literally  translated  is  '  in  the  land  of  dust.'  Bevan  thinks 
that  we  should  expect  a  transposition  of  the  words  in  the  original. 
Marti  explains  'the  dust'  as  defining  the  term  'earth,'  i.e.  earth 
which  is  dust.  Driver  renders  *  the  dusty  earth,'  which  comes  to 
the  same  thing;  but  these  are  unsatisfactory.  'Aphar,  i.e.  dust, 
can  be  used  as  a  synonym  of  Sheol,  cf.  Job  xvii.  16,  xx.  11, 
xxi.  26,  Ps.  XXX.  9.  Hence  we  should  simply  render  the  text 
as  it  stands,  '  In  the  land  of  dust.'  The  Babylonian  Hades, 
which  is  the  same  as  that  of  the  ancient  Hebrews,  is  described  in  the 
Descent  of  Ishtar,  as  '  the  dark  house  . .  .  the  house  from  which  he 
who  enters  never  emerges  .  .  .  where  dust  is  their  nourishment, 
clay  their  food.' 

shall  awake.  Isa.  xxvi.  19,  where  the  same  verb  is  used  in 
the  same  sense. 

everlasting*  life.  Here  only  in  the  O.T.,  but  of  frequent 
occurrence  in  Apocalyptic  literature,  in  the  Targums,  the  Talmuds, 
and  other  Jewish  writings.  It  is  found  in  i  Enoch  xv.  4,  6  which 
is  older  than  the  present  text. 

shame  (and)  everlasting*  contempt.  The  copula  is  not  found 
in  the  text,  but  it  is  probably  right,  as  it  is  found  in  the  two  Greek 
versions  and  in  the  Syriac.  The  word  *  contempt '  is  found  only 
once  besides  in  the  O.  T.,  i.e.  in  Isa.  Ixvi.  24,  *  They  shall  be  an 
abhorring  unto  all  flesh.' 

3.  This  verse  refers  to  the  teachers  and  leaders  of  the  faithful. 
Amongst  these  would  naturally  be  the  martyrs  and  confessors  of 
Judaism,  who  with  the  teachers  would  be  distinguished  from  the 
rest  of  the  faithful  Israelites.     Cf.  i  Enoch  civ.  2. 


DANIEL  12.  4,  5  T4t 

shine   as  the   brightness   of  the   firmament ;   and  they 
that  turn  many  to  righteousness  as  the  stars   for  ever 
and  ever.     But  thou,  O  Daniel,  shut  up  the  words,  and  4 
seal  the  book,  even  to  the  time  of  the  end  :  many  shall 
run  to  and  fro,  and  knowledge  shall  be  increased. 

Then  I  Daniel  looked,  and,  behold,  there  stood  other  5 
two,  the  one  on  the  brink  of  the  river  on  this  side,  and 


*  Be  hopeful ;  for  aforetime  ye  were  put  to  shame  through  ill 
and  affliction  ; 

But  now  ye  shall  shine  as  the  lights  of  heaven, 
Ye  shall  shine  and  ye  shall  be  seen, 
And  the  portals  of  heaven  shall  be  opened  to  you.' 
Cf.  also  4  Ezra  vii.  97. 

they  that  be  wise.     Cf.  xi.  33,  35. 

the  brightness  of  the  firmament.     Cf.  Exod.  xxiv.  10. 

turn  many  to  rig-hteousness.    Cf.  Pirke  Aboth  v.  26,  '  Who- 
soever makes  the  many  righteous,  sin  prevails  not  over  him,  and 
whosoever  makes  the  many  to  sin  they  grant  him  not  the  faculty 
to  repent.'     This  passage  is  clearly  dependent  on  our  text. 
4.   The  augePs  last  cotnniission  to  Daniel. 

shut  up  the  words,  and  seal.  The  book  was  to  be  concealed 
and  sealed.     With  the  former  injunction  cf.  viii.  26. 

to  the  time  of  the  end.  The  entire  book,  as  it  is  said  in 
viii.  17,  26,  belongs  to  the  time  of  Antiochus'  persecution,  when 
the  seals  should  be  removed  and  the  book  understood.  Contrast 
Rev.  xxii.  10. 

many  shall  run  to  and  fro.  These  words  are  generally 
taken  to  mean,  shall  run  to  and  fro  in  the  book,  i.  e.  shall  diligently 
study  it,  but,  as  Behrmann  points  out,  the  word  would  not 
naturally  mean  an  earnest  study  of  the  book,  but  a  superficial 
reading  of  it.  The  LXX  here  points  to  what  was  the  true  and 
original  meaning.  The  text  both  of  this  clause  and  the  next  is 
very  corrupt.  I  cannot  do  more  here  than  add  a  translation  ot 
what  appears  to  be  the  original  text,  reconstructed  from  the  basis 
of  the  Versions.  Hence  instead  of  '  many  shall  run  to  and  fro, 
and  knowledge  shall  be  increased '  read  '  and  many  shall 
apostatize  and  evils  shall  be  multiplied  upon  the  earth.' 

5-7.  Vision  of  the  two  angels,  one  of  whom  states  the  duration 
of  the  troubles  just  foretold. 

other  two,  i.  e.  in  addition  to  the  being  who  appeared  to 
Daniel  in  x.  5,  clothed  in  linen,  and  who  had  imparted  to  him 
the  revelation  in  x.  11-14,  19 — xii»  4- 

N  2 


142  DANIEL  12.  6,  7 

6  the  other  on  the  brink  of  the  river  on  that  side.  And  one 
said  to  the  man  clothed  in  linen,  which  was  above  the 
waters  of  the  river,  How  long  shall  it  be  to  the  end  of 

7  these  wonders  ?  And  I  heard  the  man  clothed  in  linen, 
which  was  above  the  waters  of  the  river,  when  he  held  up 
his  right  hand  and  his  left  hand  unto  heaven,  andfjware 
by  him  that  liveth  for  ever  that  it  shall  be  for  a  time,  times, 
and  an  half;  and  when  they  have  made  an  end  of  break- 
ing in  pieces  the  power  of  the  holy  people,  all  these  things 

the  river  (ye^or).  The  word  used  here  is  elsewhere  in  the 
O.T.  the  usual  designation  for  the  Nile.  It  is  the  same  river  that 
is  mentioned  in  x.  4,  which,  as  we  saw  in  the  note  on  that  passage, 
is  most  probably  the  Euphrates. 

6.  And  one  said  to  the  man.     Cf.  viii.  13. 

the  man  clothed  in  linen:  the  same  being  as  is  described  in 
X.  5,  6. 

these  wonders,  i.e.  the  things  prophesied  in  xi.  31-36, 
xii,  I. 

7.  he  held  up  his  rigrht  hand  and  his  left  hand  nnto  heaven, 
and  he  sware.  The  lifting  up  of  the  hand  and  swearing  is  mentioned 
in  Gen.  xiv.  22,  Exod.  vi.  8,  Deut.  xxxii.  40.  Here  both  hands 
are  lifted  up  by  the  angel  in  the  case  of  this  most  solemn  oath. 

him  that  liveth  for  ever.  This  was  a  familiar  phrase  of  the 
time,  see  note  on  iv.  34  where  it  has  already  occurred. 

for  a  time,  times,  and  an  half,  i.e.  three  years  and  a  half. 
Whether  this  period  began  with  the  mission  of  Apollonius  or  with 
the  erection  of  the  heathen  altar  is  doubtful.  In  any  case  it 
defines  the  limit  of  the  reign  of  the  Antichrist ;  see  notes  on  vii.  25 
and  viii.  14. 

and  when  they  have  made  an  end  of  breakingf  in  pieces 
the  power  of  the  holy  people,  all  these  thingfs  shall  be 
finished.  We  have  here  a  fresh  time  determination,  and  it  is 
entirely  vague,  and  apparently  has  no  connexion  whatever  with 
the  definite  time  determination  just  given.  The  angel  has  just 
declared  with  a  most  solemn  oath  that  all  will  come  to  an  end  in 
three  years  and  a  half.  He  could  not  have  followed  this  definite 
statement  by  one  so  entirely  vague,  and  not  even  true  to  fact. 
F'or  the  power  of  the  holy  people  was  not  w^holly  broken  in  pieces. 
The  fact  that  the  Versions  take  different  directions,  shows  that  the 
present  Hebrew  text  is  secondary.  The  way  out  of  this  impasse  is 
suggested  by  the  LXX,  which  requires  us  to  transpose  two  of  the 
Hebrew  words,  as  Bevan  has  recognized.     When  this  is  done  and 


DANIEL  12.  s-io  143 

shall  be  finished.     And  I  heard,  but  I  understood  not :  S 
then  said  I,  O  my  lord,  what  shall  be  the  "  issue  of  these 
things?      And  he  said,  Go  thy  way,   Daniel:    for  the  9 
words  are  shut  up  and  sealed  till  the  time  of  the  end. 
Many    shall    purify    themselves,   and    make   themselves  lo 
white,  and  be  refined  j  but  the  wicked  shall  do  wickedly  ; 
and  none  of  the  wicked  shall  luiderstand  :  but ''  they  that 

'  Or,  latter  Old  ^  Or,  the  teachers 


a  slight  change  made  in  the  pointing,  we  arrive  at  the  followiiij:^ 
excellent  text.  *And  when  the  power  of  the  shatter,  r  of  the 
holy  people  should  be  finished  all  these  things  should  be  finished.' 
'The  shatterer  of  the  holy  peoi)lc  *  is  of  course  Antiochus.  The 
angel  proclaims  with  the  most  solemn  oath  that  this  oppressor  is 
the  last  of  all  the  oppressors. 

8.  Daniel,  as  living  at  the  time  of  Cyrus,  is  represented  as  not 
understanding  this  time  determination,  and  as  therefore  seeking 
more  explicit  information.  To  the  readers  of  the  book  in  the 
time  of  Antiochus  the  meaning  of  ver.  7  was  of  course  quite  clear. 
This  is  the  usual  interpretation  of  these  words,  but  it  must  be 
confessed  that  it  is  not  quite  satisfactory  that  Daniel  should  again 
ask  'what  is  the  end  of  these  things?'  when  he  has  already'  been 
told  it  repeatedly.     The  LXX  suggests  a  better  text. 

what  shall  "be  the  issue  of  these  thing^s?  The  word 
rendered  '  issue '  is  better  rendered  in  the  margin  '  latter  end,' 
and  is  in  fact  a  synonym  for  the  word  translated  'end'  in  ver.  6 
and  ver.  9.  In  rendering  the  word  'issue'  the  Revisers  attempted 
to  extract  some  meaning  from  a  bad  text. 

9.  The  angel  refuses  to  give  any  further  explanation  of  the 
things  belonging  to  the  end.  They  are  not  for  the  prophet  but  for 
the  readers  of  the  distant  future.  The  same  view  of  prophecy  is 
expressed  in  i  Pet.  i.  ro-12. 

10.  This  verse  repeats  for  the  most  part  what  has  been  said  in 
xi.  35,  as  to  the  time  of  the  end  being  a  period  of  trial  and 
probation.  As  this  trial  will  refine  and  purify  the  faithful  it  will 
only  deepen  and  confirm  the  wicked  in  their  wickedness. 

none  of  the  wicked  shall  understand,  but  they  that  he 
wise  shall  understand.  The  wicked  act  blindly,  but  the  wise 
have  understanding  in  the  ways  of  the  Lord.  On  the  other  hand, 
it  is  quite  possible  that  the  words  refer  to  the  understanding 
or  the  lack  of  understanding  of  the  words  of  the  prophets,  and 
particularly  of  the  words  of  this  prophet. 


144  DANIEL  12.  11-13 

1 1  be  wise  shall  understand.  And  from  the  time  that  the 
continual  bur?it  offering  shall  be  taken  away,  and  the 
abomination  that  maketh  desolate  set  up,  there  shall  be 

12  a  thousand  two  hundred  and  ninety  days.  Blessed  is  he 
that  waiteth,  and  comcth  to  the  thousand  three  hundred. 

13  and  five  and  thirty  days.  But  go  thou  thy  way  till  the  end 
be :  for  thou  shalt  rest,  and  shalt  stand  in  thy  lot,  at  the 
end  of  the  days. 

ri,  12.  In  verse  9  the  angel  clg.irly  refused  to  give  Daniel  an}' 
further  information  on  the  period  yet  to  elapse  before  the  coming 
of  the  kingdom.  And  j'et  we  find  in  these  two  verses  two  new 
and  di/Terent  reckonings  given  which  are  in  conflict  with  the  one 
already  furnished  in  viii.  14.  In  viii.  14  it  is  stated  that  1,150  days 
should  elapse,  from  the  doing  away  with  the  continual  burnt 
offering,  till  the  cleansing  of  the  sanctuary.  These  two  new 
reckonings  start  from  the  same  date,  i.e.  from  the  removal  of  the 
continual  burnt  offering.  Cf.  viii.  14,  ix.  27,  xi.  31.  Both  verses 
are,  I  think,  without  doubt  to  be  taken  with  Gunkel  and  Marti  as 
glosses,  that  were  added  successively  with  a  view  to  bringing  the 
text  into  accord  with  history  by  adjourning  the  date  of  the  fulfil- 
ment of  the  prophecy.  As  such,  these  glosses,  therefore,  must 
have  originated  at  the  time.  The  period  mentioned  in  ver.  ii. 
i.e.  1,290  da3's,  is  easy  to  explain.  It  obviously  defines  the  dura- 
tion of  the  32  3'ears.  If  we  insert  in  the  3^  j'ears  (-^42  months 
=  1,260  days.  Cf.  Rev.  xi.  3,  xii.  6)  an  intercalary  month,  we 
have  43  months  in  the  3I  years,  and  if  we  take  these  as  consisting 
of  30  da3's  each,  we  arrive  at  the  number  1,290.  How  1,335  is  to 
be  explained  otherwise  than  on  the  ground  of  practical  necessit}-, 
I  do  not  see.  It  amounts  to  45  days,  or  i^  months  more  than 
1,290  days. 

11.  The  abomination  that  maketh  desolate.  Cf.  viii.  13, 
ix.  37,  xi.  31. 

13.  The  book  closes  with  a  word  of  comfort  to  Daniel. 

thou  Shalt  rest,  i.e.  in  the  grave.     Isa.  Ivii.  2. 

Shalt  stand,  i.e.  'shalt  arise,'  though  the  meaning  of 
resurrection,  apparently  attached  to  the  word  here,  is  not  found 
elsewhere. 

in  thy  lot.  The  seer,  as  belonging  to  the  pre-eminently 
faithful,  shall  one  day  rise  to  share  in  the  blessedness  announced 
by  him. 

end  of  the  days.  Cf.  x.  14  where  the  phrase,  though 
different  in  the  Hebrew,  has  practicallj'  the  same  meaning. 


INDEX 


Abednego,  9,  28,  32-7. 
Abiesdri,  1 1  n. 
Abomination.     See  Desolate. 
Abydenus    {On  the  Assyrians), 

38  n. 
Additions     in      Daniel,     xxxi, 

xxxii. 
Adonai,  Lord,  4  n.,  96  n. 
Adonis,  'the  desire  of  women,' 

135". 

Ahasuerus,  94. 

Alexander's  conquests.  74  n., 
85  (*a  notable  horn  '). 

Altar,  heathen,  set  up  by  An- 
tiochus  in  Temple,  x,  88  n., 
89  n.,  no  n.,  131  n. 

Ammon,  137. 

Ancient  of  days  =  an  aged 
being,  75 ;  an  apocalyptic 
form  of  expression,  75  n. 

Angelic  patrons  of  the  nations. 
115  n.  ;  explain  delay  in 
coming  of  Messianic  kingdom, 
xliii.     See  Michael,  Prince. 

Angels,  a  heavenly  council 
;^heaven's),  43  n. ;  army  of 
heaven,  47  n. ;  holy  one, 
43  n.,  88  ;  watcher,  43  n.,  45. 

Angelus  interpres,  79  n. 

Antichrist,  AntiochusEpiphanes 
the  prototype  of,  xlii. 

Antiochus  II,  120  n. 

Antiochus  III,  the  Great,  122 
sq.  n.;  conquest  of  Cherso- 
nese, defeated  at  Thermo- 
pylae and  Magnesia,  125  n. 

Antiochus  Epiphanes,  ix,  x,  xi, 
xxxvi,  xxxvii,  xlii,  xliii,  50 
n,,  69  sq.  nn,,  71  n. ;  *  a  little 
horn,'  74  n.,  86  n.  ;  assumes 
divine  titles,    134  n.  ;  attacks 


holy  people,  93 ;  attacks 
Jerusalem,  ix,  x,  130  n.  ; 
conquests,  ia8,  129  ;  descrip- 
tion of,  92,  126  sq.  notes  ; 
devotion  to  Olympian  Zeus, 
134  n.  ;  diverse  from  his  pre- 
decessors, 81  n. ',  end  of 
'between  the  sea  and  the  holy 
mountain,' 138;  but  actually 
died  at  Tabae  in  Persia,  138 
n.  ;  generosity  of,  ia8  n.  ; 
in  Egypt,  128  n. ;  persecutes 
Jews,  80,  81,  &c,  ;  profanes 
sanctuary,  131  n. ;  suspends 
temple  worship,  82-3  n. 

Apedno,  136  n. 

Apocalypse,  the  Little,  in  Mark 
xiii,  70  n. 

Apocalyptic  and  Prophecy,  xiii. 

Apocalyptic,  ethical  character 
of,  xvi  ;  pseudonymous  in 
Judaism,  xiv,  xvi. 

A  pocalj'ptic  forms  of  expression . 
See  Ancient  of  Days,  Ap- 
pearance of  a  Man,  Son  of 
Man. 

Apostates,  Jewish,  131  n.,  132. 

Appearance  of  a  man  :  an  apo- 
calyptic form  of  expression 
for  an  angel    Gabriel  ,  89  n. 

Aramaic  of  Daniel,  not  the  ver- 
nacular of  Babylonia,xxi,  17  n. 

Aramaic  original  of  Daniel,  xii, 
xix-xxvi,  16  n. 

Aramaic  of  Ezra,  xx,  xxv. 

Arioch,  19  n.,  20,  22. 

Ashpenaz,  6. 

Assumption  of  Moses,  70  n. 

Azariah,  8,  9,  11,  12,  20; 
prayer  of,  35  n. 

Azda  =  sure,  certain,  17  n. 


146 


DANIEL 


Babylon,  19,  ao,  2a,  28,  29,  37, 
40,  46. 

Babylonian  Empire,  25,  70,  72  n. 

Bagpipe  (R.V.  marg.  for  •  Dul- 
cimer', 31  n. 

Barnabas,  Epistle  of,  70  n. 

Baruch,  First  Book  of,  97  sq. 
notes. 

Bath-Kol,  xliii,  47  n. 

Bear  -  Median  Empire.  73  n. 

Beast,  the  Fourth,  burned  with 
fire.  i.  e.  cast  into  final  place 
of  punishment,  77  n. 

Beasts,  the  four  •=  four  king- 
doms, 70  n. 

Belsarusur,  49  n. 

Belshazzar,  48  sqq.,  50,  53,  57, 
59,  67,  8a. 

Belteshazzar,  9,  23,  41,44, 11  r. 

Benedicite,  the  hymn,  35  n. 

Berenice,  wife  of  Antiochus  II, 
120  n. 

Berosus,  3  n. 

Bibliography,  xliii-xlv. 

Book,  written  in,  139. 

Book  of  life,  139  n. 

Books,  opened,  77  n. 

Books,  the,  i.  e.  Scripture,  95, 
96  n. 

Break  off  (or  '  Redeem,'  i.  e. 
=  Heb.  parak;,  46  n. 

Canon,  Jewish,  divisions  of, 
xxxiv  ;  formation  of,  xv,  xvi. 

Captain  of  the  king's  guard, 
20  n. 

Chain  of  gold,  53  n. 

Chaldaean  king,  59. 

Chaldaeans,  7,  15,  16,  17,  19, 
31 »  53'  54»  95  ;  a  tribe,  con- 
quered Babylonia,  7  n.  ;  a 
caste  of  wise  men,  7  n.,  15  n. 

Chaldee,  a  misnomer  for  the 
Aramaic  of  Daniel,  xxi. 

Children,  The  Three,  35  n. 

Chronology : 

Babylonian,  xxxvii,xxxviii. 


Jewish,  xxxix-xli ;  of  Seleu- 
cidae,  xxxviii-xli;  of  Ptole- 
mies, xxxix,  xl ;  errors  in, 
3  n.,  i3n.,  107  n.,  irS  n. 
Clean    and    unclean,    rules   of, 

xliii,  9,  ion. 
Clouds  of  heaven,  78  n. 
Commentaries,  xlv. 
Consummation,  no. 
Continual  burnt  oflcriug,  87  n. ; 

taken    away    by   Antiochus, 

87  n.,  88,  no,  144. 
Cornet,  30  n. 
Counsellors  ,30  n.(-haddab6rin), 

35  n-,  48.  62. 
Covenant,  he  shall   make  firm. 

(See  proposed  emendations  , 

109  n.;     them   thai   forsake, 

131  n. ;  such  as  do  wickedly 

against,  132  n. 
Curse  .  .  .  and  the  oath,  written 

in  the  law  of  Moses,  99  n. 
Cyrus,  13  n.,  48  sqq.  n.,  67,  t  1 1 ; 

king  of  Persia,  inn.  ;  takes 

Babylon,  49  n. 

Daniel,  8-13.  19-23.  28,41.  44, 
55'  59-6r,  63  7,  70,  79,  82. 
83,  89,94,  95.  io3>  iii»  113- 
114,  141,  143. 

Daniel,  Book  of,  Additions  and 
Glosses  in, xxxijXxxii;  among 
Hagiographa  in  Massoretic, 
xxxiv  ;  antecedents,  histori- 
cal, of,  ix-xi ;  authorities, 
textual,  xxxii-xxxiii.  See 
also,  Versions.  Bibliography, 
xliii-xlv ;  Character,  pseu- 
donymous, xi-xii,  xiv-xvi  ; 
Date,  xxxiii-xxxvii ;  Lan- 
guage, original,  xii,  xix-xxvi; 
Publication,  occasion  of,  xi ; 
Success,  xi ;  Theology,  xli ; 
Versions,  xxvi,  xxxi. 

Daniel,  homage  paid  to.  See 
Homage. 

Darius,  59, 60, 62, 63. 67, 94, 1 18. 


INDEX 


147 


Darius  the  Mede  ,?«Gubarif  . 

59-6011. 
Darins,  *  son  of  Ahasucius,'  94, 

95". 
Date,    Scr  Daniel. 
Days,  a  tliousand  two  Jiundrcd 

and  ninc'l3',  144  n. ;  a  thousand 

three  hundred  and   five  and 

thirlN',   144  n.     See  Ancient, 

Latter. 
Demetrius,    an    Egyptian  Jew, 

error  in  chronology',  107  n. 
Deputy'.  28  n.,  29,  30.  36,  62. 
Desolate.  88  ;  abomination,  that 

niaketh,  88n..  iion.,  i3rn., 

144. 
Determiners  ^R.V. soothsayers), 

16  n.,  23.  41,  53,  54. 
Dissolving  of  doubts,  55  n.    See 

Resolving. 
Dulcimer,  31  n. 
Dura,  plain  of,  29  n. 
Dust  of  the  earth  =  Sheol,i4on, 

Edom,  137. 

Egypt,  loi,  122,  137,  138. 
Elam.  province  of,  83. 
Empires,    the   four,  25.   26  n.  ; 

=  four    parts  of  image,   25 ; 

«=four  beasts,  68  sq.,  i72sq., 

notes. 
Enchanters,   13,    15  n.,   19,   23, 

41,  53;  54,  55- 

End,  of  the  times  ;^so  read  for 
'troublous  times'),  107  n.; 
time  of,  the,  90  n.,  134,  136, 
143  n.,  144  n.  See  Consum- 
mation, Latter  Days. 

Enoch,  First  Book  of,  75-9, 
notes. 

Enoch,  Second  Book  of,  xviii 

Ephrem  Syrus,  69  n. 

Eternity.     See  Immortality. 

Ethical  character  of  Apoca- 
lyptic.    See  Apocalyptic. 

Ethiopians,  138, 

Eunuchs,  6n. 


Eusebius,  38  n. 

Evening  oblation,  time  of,  103. 

Evenings   and    mornings,    two 

thousand  and  three  hundred, 

89  n.  ;  vision  of.  93  n. 
Ezekiel,  xv. 
Ezra,  Fourth  Book  ot,  69  n. 

Fasting  as  a  preparation  for  a 
revelation,  96  n.;  practice  of, 
112  n.,  115  n. 

Fathers  «=  leaders,  98  n. 

Flood    w  war  ,  108  n. 

Flute,  30  n. 

Forgivenesses,  99. 

Gabriel,  9011..  103. 

Gehenna,  Resurrection  of  Jew- 
ish apostates  to,  xlii. 

Glosses  in  Daniel,  xxxi,  xxxii. 

God,  names  of:  Adonai,  4  n.  ; 
Yahweh,96n.;  'prince  of  the 
host,' 8711.;  prince  of  princes, 
93  n. ;  God  of  gods  and  Lord 
of  kings,  28n. ;  God  of  heaven, 
20  n.,  21,  25,  27  ;  Great  and 
dreadful  God,  &c.,  96  ;  Lord 
God,96;Lordmy  ('ourGod'). 
97,  99,  loi,  102  ;  Most  High 
God,  36 n.,  40, 56;  Most  High, 

44?  45,  47?  81. 

God,  'before  God,' 6411.;  house 
of,  see  Temple. 

God,  a  strange,  135  n. ;  of  for- 
tresses =  Jupiter  Capitoli- 
nus  (?),  135  n. 

Gods,  the  holy,  41  n. 

Governors.  3on. 

Greece,  92,  117,  118. 

Greek  ;  or  Macedonian)  Empire, 
26n.;  the  fourth  empire,  70  n., 
73-4, 84  n. 

Greek.     See  Versions. 

Gubaru,  49  n. 

Haddabgrin,  35  n. 
Hagiographa,     Daniel     placed 


148 


DANIEL 


among,    in    Jewish    Canon, 

xxxiv. 
Hananiah,  8,  9,  11,  la,  20. 
Harp,  31  n. 
Hasidim,  x. 
Heathen,     powerlessness     of, 

against  God,  enforced  in  ch. 

iv,  39  n. 
Heathen  empires,  xi ;   how  re- 
lated to  Israel,  xi. 
Heaven,    army  of  (  =  angels), 

47  n. ;    host  of  (  -^  the  people 

of  God},  86-7  n. 
Heavens  =   God,     46  n.;      or 

heavenly  powers,  i,  c.  angels, 

45  n- 

Heavenly  council  of  God,  43  n. 
See  Angels. 

Hebrew,  not  original  language 
of  Daniel,  xxv. 

He-goat  =  Greek  Empire,  84  n., 
91 ;    =  Greece,  92. 

Hellenizing  policy.  See  An- 
tiochus,  High-priests. 

Heracles,  festival  of,  at  Tyre,  ix. 

Herodotus'  account  of  capture 
of  Babylon,  49  n. 

Hiddekel,  river,  112  n.  (agloss\ 

High  Priests,  ix  ;  Hellenizing 
policy  of,  ix. 

Historical  difficulties  in  ch.  v, 
48-50 n.;  errors,  ii8n.,i38n.; 
statements  in  ch.  iv.  See 
Sources. 

History,  transition  from  to 
prophecy,  in  account  of  An- 
tiochus  Epiphanes,  136  n. 

Holy  people,  i.  e.  Israel,  93, 
142  ;  *  Shatterer  of  =  Antio- 
chus,  143. 

Homage  paid  to  Daniel,  27  n. 

Horn,  a  little  =  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes, 74  n.,  86  n. ;  a  notable 
=  Alexander  the  Great,  85  n. ; 
four  notable  (rather  '  four 
other')  horns  =  the  four  king- 
doms of   the    Diadochi,   85- 


6n.;  symbol  of  king,  74  n.; 
of  dynasty,  74  n. 

Horns,  the  ten,  71  n.;  the  three 
plucked  up,  71  n.;  Seleucus 
IV,  Heliodorus,  and  Deme- 
trius I,  74  n. 

Hosen,  34  n. 

Host,  read  '  service,'  88  n. 

Host,  see  Heaven.  '  An  host 
was  given  over  to  it,'  87  n. 

House  of  God  =  Temple,  5  n. 

Hymn,  of  Daniel,  ai  n. 


Idolatry  condemned,  xliii  ;  op- 
position to  enforced, in  ch.  iii, 
29  n. 

Immortality,  of  individual,  not 
clearly  taught  in  Daniel,  xlii, 
139  n.  ;  of  the  Messianic 
kingdom,  xlii,  139  n. 
nterpretation  of  the  Book  of 
Daniel,  xliii-xliv ;  by  Por- 
phyry, xliii. 

Interpretation  of  dreams  de- 
manded by  Nebuchadnezzar, 
]6  n.,  40;  given  by  Daniel, 
25,  44  ;  of  visions  requested 
b}'  Daniel,  79,  80,  89  ;  given 
by  angel,  79,  80,  88,  91,  loi, 
114  sq. 

Israel,  6,  98,  99,  102. 


Jason,  high-priest,  ix. 

Jehoiakim,  3.  4. 

Jeremiah,  96. 

Jeremiah's  prophecy  of  the  70 

years,  94  n. ;    reinterpreted, 

95  n. 
Jerusalem,  3,  51,  96,  98,  loi, 

106;  =  the  city  called  byname 

of  the  Lord,  102  n. 
Jews,  32. 
Judah,  3,  4,  8,  22,  55,  64,  98  ; 

captivity  of,  22,  55,  64. 
Judgement,  Divine,  on  heathen 


INDEX 


149 


powers,  75  n. ;  final,  by  God, 
xliii.     See  also  Saints. 
Judges,  30  n. ;    =■  rulers,  100  11. 

Kingdom.  S^<? Messianic  saints. 
King's  meat,  8  n. 
Kittim.  130  n. 

Land,  the  glorious,  86  11. 

Language.  See  Hebrew,  Ara- 
maic. 

Laodice,  wife  of  Antiochus  II, 
120  n. 

Latter  days.  23  n.     See  End. 

Latter  time  of  the  indignation. 
91  n. 

Law,  X  ;  supremacy,  xii.  xv. 
XV  i. 

Law,  loyalty  to  enforced  in 
ch.  i,  3  n. 

Law  of  Moses.  99. 

Law    '  dath'),  19  n. 

Leopard  =  Persian  Empire,  73. 

Libyans,  138. 

Lion  =  Babylonian  Empire  of 
Nebuchadnezzar,  72  n. 

Maccabean  date  of  Daniel,  xliv. 
Maccabean  rising,  x;   *a  little 

help,'  133  n- 
Macedonian  Empire,  26  n.    See 

Greek. 
Magicians,  13.  15  n.,  19,23,41, 

54- 
Mantles,  35  n. 
Mas.soretic,      xiii ;      variations 

from  LXX  in  ch.  iv,  37,  38  n. 
Mattathias,  x,  133  n. 
Mcde,  Darius  the,  59  n..  118. 
Medes,  59,  63,  64,  65.  95. 
Medes  and  Persians,  59;  law  of, 

63,64,  65. 
Media  and  Persia,  91. 
Median  and  Persian  kingdoms, 

25  n.,  60  n. 
Median  Empire,  70  n.,   73  n., 

84  n. 


Megasthenes,  38  n. 

Melsar,  n  n. 

Mene.     See  Writing. 

Menelaus,  high  priest,  ix. 

Meshach,  9,  28,  32-7. 

Messianic  kingdom, catastrophic 
inauguration,  xliii ;  expected 
on  earth  in  Daniel,  xlii  ;  hope 
of.  enforced  in  ch.  ii,  I3.i4n., 
79, 80;  resurrection  of  mart3rs 
and  great  saints  to,  xlii  ; 
supernatural  character,  xlii. 

Michael,  115,  118,  139;  the 
angelic  patron  of  Israel,  xliii ; 
115  n.,  118,  139;  one  of  the 
chief  princes,  115  ;  the  great 
prince,  139. 

Mishael,  8,  9,  ri,  12,  20. 

Moab,  137. 

Moral  teaching.  S^^Apocalyptic. 

Moses,  99,  100.  See  also  '  As- 
sumption.' 

Music,  instruments  of,  65  n. 

Musical  instruments,  30,  31  n. 

Nabunaid,  49  n.  sqq. 
Name,  change  of,  9n. 
Nebuchadnezzar,  3,  12.  13,  23, 

28-35,<    37,     44,     46-8,    51, 
.  54,  56. 
Nebuchadnezzar's  second  year, 

14  n. 
Nisan,  the  first  month,  112  n. 
Nobles  (Part^mim),  6n. 

Odours,  sweet,  28  n. 

Officials,  administrative.  See 
counsellors,  deputies,  go- 
vernors, judges,  satraps, 
sheriffs,  29,  30  n.;  court.  See 
captain,  eunuch,  steward, 
third  ruler,  wise  men. 

Onias  III,  high  priest,  ix. 

Original  language,  see  Ara- 
maic ;  bilingual  text,  different 
theories  to  account  for,  xx- 


'5° 


DANIEL 


xxv;  due  to  diversity  of  origin, 
xxi,xxii;  fortunes  of  the  pub- 
lication, xxiv,  xxv. 

Palestine  =  the  glorious  land, 
86  n. 

Paneas,  battle  of.  123  n. 

People,     See  Holy. 

Peoples,  nations, and  languages, 
30  n.,  sr.  36,  37>56,  67,  78. 

Peras,  59  n. 

Peres.     See  Writing. 

Persia,  91,  iir,  115,117.  118; 
four  kings  of,  Ii8n. 

Persian,  Gyrus  the,  67. 

Persian  Empire, 25, 7on.. 73,84  n. 

Persians,  59,  63.  6.^,  65. 

Peshitto,  xiii,  xxx. 

Pirke  Aboth,  1 4 in. 

Porphyry,  69  n. 

Porphj'ry's  Treatise  agaiust  the 
Christians,  xliii ;  interpreta- 
tion of  Daniel,  xliii-xliv. 

Pra3'er,  duty  of  private,  60 n.; 
the  three  hours  of,  63,  64  n. ; 
turningto  Jerusalem  in,  63n.: 
as  a  preparation  for  a  revela- 
tion, 96  ;  in  ix.  4-19  an  in- 
terpolation, 96,  97  n. 

Pra3'er  of  Azarias,  35  n. 

Prince  =  high-priest,  108  n. 

Prince  =  angelic  patron,  115  n., 
117;  of  Persia,  115;  of  Israel 
(Michael),!  18;  ofGreece,ii7. 

Prince  of  princes.  See  God  ; 
of  the  host.     See  God. 

Princes  =  angelic  chiefs,  93  n. 

Problems,  bilingual.  See  He- 
brew, Aramaic. 

Prophecy  and  Apocalyptic,  xiii. 
Sec  also  History. 

Prophet,  psychical  state  of,  xiii. 

Prophets,  98 ;  the  servants  t'f 
God,  98,  99. 

Psaltery,  31  n. 

Pseudon3'mity,causesof,  xv,xvi. 

Ptolemies,  the,  xxxlx. 


Ptolemy  II  and  HI,  120 and  121  n. 

Ptolemy  Epiphancs,  123  n. 

Ptolemy  Philopator,  123  n. 

Punishment,  by  dismember- 
ment, i8n.  ;  by  dishonouring 
house,  18  n. 

Purge  away  (R.V.  '  make  re- 
conciliation for'  ,  105  n. 

Purple,  the  roj'al  dignity  of 
wearing,  53  n. 

Pusey,  xliv-xlv. 

Queen-dowager,  53  n. 

Ram  with  two  horns  =  Empires 
of  Media  and  Persia,  84  n. 

Raphia.  battle  of,  12a  n. 

Reconciliation,  to  make.  See 
Purge  away. 

Resolving  of  enchantments,55n. 

Resurrection,  onl3'  of  pre- 
eminently righteous  or 
wicked,  expected  in  Daniel, 
xiii,  139  n.,  144  n. 

Revelation,  preparations  for, 
96-7  n.  ;  include  pra3'er, 
fasting,  wearing  of  sackcloth 
and  ashes. 

Righteousness  ■■  almsgiving, 
46  n. 

Righteousness,  eternal  =  the 
true  worship  of  God,  or  the 
eternal  righteousness  of  the 
Messianic  kingdom,  105  n. 

Roman  Empire  wrongly  re- 
garded as  the  Fourth  Empire 
of  Daniel,  70  n. 

Rules  as  to  clean  and  unclean 
food,  xliii,  9,  ID  n. 

Sackbut,  31  n. 

Sacrifices  discontinued,  x. 

Saints,  war  with,  74  n.,  60; 
judgement  (rather  dominion") 
given  to,  80-1;  kingdom  of, 
79  n.  ;  heavenly  in  origin, 
everlasting  in  duration,  80  n. 


INDEX 


15* 


Sanctuary,  cleansed.  89  n. ;  de- 
stroyed, 108  n.;  trodden  under 
foot,  88  n. 

Satraps,  29  n. 

Scopas,  133  n. 

Seasons.     See  Times. 

Seleucidae,  xxxviii,  71  n. 

Seleucus  Ceraunus,  122  n. 

Seleucus  II,  121  n. 

Seleucus  IV,  126  n. 

Septuagint.     See  Versions. 

Seventy  years,  in  Jeremiah's 
prophecy  of  the  captivity,  re- 
interpreted as  seventy  weeks 
of  years,  104  n. 

Shadrach,  9,  28,  32-7. 

Sheol,  in  Daniel,  a  non-moral 
region,  intermediate  abode  of 
very  good  and  very  evil  i  till 
Resurrection)  ;  eternal  abode 
of  rest  of  Israel  and  all  Gen- 
tiles, xlii;  -dust  of  the  earth, 
or  rather  '  the  land  of  dust,' 
140  n. 

Sheriffs,  30  n. 

Shinar,  5. 

Shushan,  the  palace,  83  n. 

Sibylline  Oracles,  xxxiii  n.  ; 
quoted,  68,  69  n. 

Signs  and  wonders,  40 

Sirach,  xxxiv. 

Son  of  Man,  78  n. ;  a  super- 
natUEel  being;  an  Apocalyptic 
form  of  expression,  78  n. 

Son  of  man  =  a  human  being 
(Daniel),  90 n. 

Soothsayers.    See  Determiners. 

Sorcerers,  16  n. 

Sources  of  historical  statements 
in  chap,  iv,  38,  39  n. 

Stand  before  =  serve,  8n. 

Steward,  ii  n. 

Symbolism  of  Apocalyptic  vi- 
sions, 76  n. 

Syriac  version  of  Paul  of  Telia, 

XXX. 

Syrian  language,  16  n.,  17. 


Tamid.  87  n.     See  continual.   ^ 

Tekel.     See  Writing. 

Temple  ^  House  of  God,  place 
of  His  (God's")  sanctuary, 
87  n. 

Temple-services  discontinued, 
X  ;  treasures  seized  by  An- 
tiochus,  X  ;  vessels  removed 
to  Babylon,  ^,  5. 

Testaments  of  XII  Patriarchs 
xviii,  x'x. 

Third  Ruler,  53  n. 

Time.     See  Days,  Evenings. 

Time  and  times  and  half  a  lime, 
82  n. 

Times  =  years,  43  n. 

Times  and  the  law,  i.  e.  the 
religious  festivals,  &c.,  8x  n. 

Times  and  seasons,  ai  n. 

Transgression,  the,  =  the  hea- 
then worship  established  in 
the  Temple,  105  n.  Cf.  88, 
92.     See  Desolate. 

Transportation  to  Babylon,  in 
Jehoiakim's  third  year,  3  n. 

Treasurers,  30  n. 

Treatises  and  Articles,  xlv. 

Truth  =  the  true  religion,  88  n. 

Tunics,  34  n. 

Ulai,  river,  83  n.,  90. 
Upharsin.     See  Writing. 
Uphaz,  ii3n. 

Versions  of  Daniel :  Greek,  xii, 
xxvi-xxx.  See  Septuagint, 
xxvi-xxx  ;  Theodotion  ;  wide 
divergence  between  LXX  and 
Theodotion,  xx ;  between 
LXX  and  Massoretic  in  ch.  iv, 
37  n. ;   Bibliography  of,  xlv. 

Vessels.     See  Temple. 

Visions,  conventional  use  of 
term,  xiv. 

Visions  of  Daniel,  67-144  ;  first, 
67  ;  second,  82  ;  third,  iij. 

Vulgate,  xiii,  xxxi. 


152 


DANIEL 


Watcher.     See  Angels. 

Week  =  lialfol  the  week,  10911.; 

seven    years,     104  n.  ;     the 

Seventh    and    Last    (of  the 

Seventy),  107  n. 
Weeks.     See  Seventy. 
Wisdom,  12  n. 
Wise  men,  a  class,   15  n.,    19, 

20;   22,  28,  40,  44,   52,  53; 

classes  of,  15  n. 
Wise,  they  that  be,  13a  n.,  133, 

14I:  143- 


Word  of  the  Lord.  96. 
Writing  on    the  wall,   52  ;    its 
interpretation,  57-99  n. 

Xenophon's  account  of  capture 
of  Babylon,  49  n. 

Yahweh,  96  n.     See  God. 

Zeus,  Olympian,  Antiochus'  de- 
sotion  to.  134  n. 


Printed  by  Ballantynk,  Hanson  <5s  Ca 
Edinburgh  &>  London 


2/13 


si 


o 


Overnight      Date  Due      *' 

i  Jiight 

R-feSWiVl 

r. 

.1 

jAf«>i«fr^ 

IWWiilK- 

^^""^ 

^ 

iiititfitirinifl 

H 

^J  AV/ 

0  IQQR 

MAY 

0  ly^D 

! 

f> 

New    (2<2n+Mpy 


Q-'Adl/.     HrzlciY^et/ 


